Why do people ignore Madonna's ephebophilic character?

[StrawberryBlond 13,460]

1 hour ago, elijahfan said:

Well, that's a very post-modern way of looking at it but yeah, that's my point: you can look at a particular situation in many different ways.

I think in this modern society, we should all be looked at as equal. I don't like how being oppressed gives certain people the right to be horrible or get rights that the non-oppressed groups do not. I don't think true equality can be gained from that. Equality is treating everyone the same and giving them no allowances, end of. If everyone was equal tomorrow, there would be no need to make allowances as everyone would be on the same level.

48 minutes ago, Didymus said:

That's because women have been conditioned into thinking they can't do what a man does though. You're ignoring historical dynamics here. It's a victory because for women there was an added obstacle. This is why there are gay pride parades: it would probably be deemed unnecessary and probably disrespectful to have a straight pride parade (at which point you could again claim there's a problematic double standard), but you'd ignore the fact that homosexuals have suffered and still suffer suppression.

When a man gets dissed for ignoring a woman's demands it's because he's giving into ancient stereotypes that should have no place in our society anymore. If we see Samantha on Sex and the City change sexual partners like dresses it is empowering not because the man's demands are getting ignored but because the woman's are being affirmed for once. In reality of course, things would be different - a woman consistently ignoring a man's needs would quickly become socially isolated (unless the man got a kick out of it), and deservedly so.

But culture is not a playing field of reality. It's a playing field of social dynamics and their subversion. Different realities and every child intuitively understands that. Just like fans of Tarantino don't go out shooting people, fans of Madonna's Sex book won't live out every sexual fantasy. Yet it can empower them in other ways, making a small change in social dynamics that can be a stepping stone for a repressed social group being embraced by the status quo. The reintegration of female sexuality is an important issue due to centuries of repression and you just dismissing that because you're clinging to the version of feminism in which men and women have to obey the same standard (which one could doubt is even feminist in nature), misrepresenting not just dynamics of empowerment but also events and people who have contributed to it, is the really problematic ideology here.

I'm not ignoring historical dynamics. I knew you were going to say all this but I reject it, honestly. It's just an excuse for women to use their oppression as a reason to do whatever they want. A lot of feminists now want to have their cake and eat it too. They want the opportunities men have, but better. They want to get away with doing stuff that men can't and aren't interested in breaking the barriers for men to do these things without comment. I'm fighting for traditional feminism where women wanted to be equal to men, not better. Notice how you said this idea doesn't work so well in reality. It doesn't take you long to realise that women doing the same negative thing that a man does is still negative and doesn't change anything. Only thinking about your own pleasure is selfish, no matter what your gender. If you're only focused on your pleasure and your feelings, well, you shouldn't be having sex at all. Sex is about a mutual pleasure experience and no one should be made to feel like they don't matter just because it makes you feel empowered. Empowerment that comes from putting another person down is not cool, be you male or female.

Of course I think reintegration of female sexuality into society is important. But some elements of that sexuality is problematic. Women can be sexually empowered without putting men down and taking on traditional male sexual roles. A woman having the freedom to do whatever she wants sexually, even if that's being submissive, is true sexual liberation. But making part of that liberation be about putting men down? It's not right. Being empowered doesn't mean much if you have to step on someone else to get it. Essentially saying that women can only be truly sexually empowered by doing what men traditionally do is hardly a feminist statement. Men and women obeying the same standards is fair. It's not non-feminist. The standards that are applied to the most dominant, privileged group, should be the ones applied to all. If men are supposedly the gender that has it the best in life, why shouldn't women aspire to be held to the same standards that they live by? Maybe because they secretly think there's some areas where men don't have it good at all and like I said earlier, they want to have their cake and eat it too? They want to focus on their pleasure, just like men, but without those pesky negative stereotypes that men endure for thinking about their pleasure while simultaneously wanting men to keep feeling shame for doing the same thing. They want it both ways. Doesn't that seem a bit selfish and inconsiderate? Who has the problematic ideology now?

 

25 minutes ago, Harry said:

Unqualified people trying their hand at something they are not experienced or educated in should have their intentions and talent questioned?

I completely agree. 

Fail. Writing an opinion on a forum is different from writing a novel. You tried, though. Oh, well, if I'm so guilty in this respect, I guess you are too. How are you qualified to state your opinion here, just as much as me? Or can only certain people put forward their opinions now? Some liberal you are.

[Harry 26,836]

5 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Fail. Writing an opinion on a forum is different from writing a novel. You tried, though. Oh, well, if I'm so guilty in this respect, I guess you are too. How are you qualified to state your opinion here, just as much as me? Or can only certain people put forward their opinions now? Some liberal you are.

I think you missed my point. Never mind. You tried.

[StrawberryBlond 13,460]

27 minutes ago, Harry said:

I think you missed my point. Never mind. You tried.

I didn't miss your point at all, you just think because I don't agree that I can't have read it correctly because you think I'm stupid. You don't like it when people match you in intelligence. Oh, I know what you're doing, with your manipulative mind games. Your attempts to discredit me and bring down my self-esteem. Despite claiming to support women, you're insistent in your quest to make a woman feel small. The irony.

[OmgSum1Actually 3,041]

I can't believe this community is so narrow-minded... Age of consent is varying from 14-18, so I don't see a problem regarding this

Some of yall were talking about hooking up over Grindr with 30+ when you're only 15/16 

 

 

[Harry 26,836]

12 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I didn't miss your point at all, you just think because I don't agree that I can't have read it correctly because you think I'm stupid. You don't like it when people match you in intelligence. Oh, I know what you're doing, with your manipulative mind games. Your attempts to discredit me and bring down my self-esteem. Despite claiming to support women, you're insistent in your quest to make a woman feel small. The irony.

I wasn't talking about your opinion at all though, so you clearly have missed the point and have no idea what I'm talking about  Nothing to do with your intelligence and I don't think you're "stupid". It was actually just a small joke making reference to stuff you've said in the past, nothing intended to make you "feel small". I've never denied your right - or anyone's right - to air an opinion.

Why do you keep making me out to be some kind of anti-feminist misogynist just because I don't like you? lmao. Isn't it you that said we shouldn't be expected to support women just for being women? That it's not the point of feminism? So why should I support your mediocrity just because you're a woman? I find bad attitudes, hypocrisy and ignorance disturbing from man or woman, so don't expect me to tone it down because of your gender. If you're going to talk about the importance of gender equality in this very thread, at least keep it consistent.

[StrawberryBlond 13,460]

20 minutes ago, OmgSum1Actually said:

I can't believe this community is so narrow-minded... Age of consent is varying from 14-18, so I don't see a problem regarding this

Of course there's a problem. It doesn't matter what the age is other countries. All that matters is the age in your country and if sexual activity is appropriate based on that. If you go to another country where it's more or less, you have to adhere to that and acknowledge the culture difference. Madonna's from America, where age of consent differs from 16-18 (19 as well?) and is also a country where a 16/17 year old can't engage in sex with anyone who is more than 1-2 years older than them. So all that matters is the law in America and bringing in the law from countries where it can be as young as 14 or 15 isn't relevant. It isn't narrow-minded to think that 14 or 15 is too young if you grew up in a country where the age of consent is higher (it is rare to find countries where the age is this low) and have grown up having this law impressed upon you and being fed through your culture. Being a product of your culture isn't the same as being narrow-minded.

14 minutes ago, Harry said:

I wasn't talking about your opinion at all though, so you clearly have missed the point and have no idea what I'm talking about  Nothing to do with your intelligence and I don't think you're "stupid". It was actually just a small joke making reference to stuff you've said in the past, nothing intended to make you "feel small". I've never denied your right - or anyone's right - to air an opinion.

Why do you keep making me out to be some kind of anti-feminist misogynist just because I don't like you? lmao. Isn't it you that said we shouldn't be expected to support women just for being women? That it's not the point of feminism? So why should I support your mediocrity just because you're a woman? I find bad attitudes, hypocrisy and ignorance disturbing from man or woman, so don't expect me to tone it down because of your gender. If you're going to talk about the importance of gender equality in this very thread, at least keep it consistent.

I know exactly what you were trying to say. That I'm not educated in music so my opinions on it shouldn't be taken seriously, nor should any other opinions based on stuff that I'm not educated in. You don't need to spell it out! But you should realise that this is completely different to a celebrity making money from doing something that would ordinarily require an education. I'm not making money from my uneducated music reviews, so how is this the same thing? I know you think it's a joke, I just don't think it's funny. Well, you sure do try to make me feel small, when you take every chance you get to undercut my opinion and basically say I have no right to say it.

Because you have no reason to dislike me! I have done nothing to you! You just started picking on me one day because you didn't like what I had to say about a piece of music and you'd never left me alone since and have even spread untrue rumours about me around this site and are determined to turn people against me. Feminism 101 - never make a woman feel bad for having an opinion and don't follow her around, picking on her. And if a woman's telling you that you're making her feel bad and making her cry (which I have done multiple times), then you should stop. Have you any idea of how much it hurts to be picked on by a man? No, you shouldn't support me just for being a woman, but support isn't the same thing is respect. I just want to you to be decent to me, not pick on me. I don't think anyone should be picked on, man or woman, so being treated equally to me is treating everyone with respect. You can disagree with me all you want, but don't make it personal and stop following me, quoting me every chance you get. And I find bad attitudes, hypocrisy and ignorance disturbing too and you're all three. If you support feminism, you should know that as a man, making it your mission to take down a woman and make her feel bad is wrong. I'm sure you're aware that bullying anyone is unacceptable. So, stop it. You do realise that your hatred towards me has partly made me wonder if I was right to air my opinions around here, if I should have been so forthright, if it's going to make people dislike me. So, congratulations, you have successfully made a women feel like she should refrain from speaking her mind because it only leads to bad things. Think about that for a minute.

[Harry 26,836]

15 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I know exactly what you were trying to say. That I'm not educated in music so my opinions on it shouldn't be taken seriously, nor should any other opinions based on stuff that I'm not educated in. You don't need to spell it out! But you should realise that this is completely different to a celebrity making money from doing something that would ordinarily require an education. I'm not making money from my uneducated music reviews, so how is this the same thing? I know you think it's a joke, I just don't think it's funny. Well, you sure do try to make me feel small, when you take every chance you get to undercut my opinion and basically say I have no right to say it.

Because you have no reason to dislike me! I have done nothing to you! You just started picking on me one day because you didn't like what I had to say about a piece of music and you'd never left me alone since and have even spread untrue rumours about me around this site and are determined to turn people against me. Feminism 101 - never make a woman feel bad for having an opinion and don't follow her around, picking on her. And if a woman's telling you that you're making her feel bad and making her cry (which I have done multiple times), then you should stop. Have you any idea of how much it hurts to be picked on by a man? No, you shouldn't support me just for being a woman, but support isn't the same thing is respect. I just want to you to be decent to me, not pick on me. I don't think anyone should be picked on, man or woman, so being treated equally to me is treating everyone with respect. You can disagree with me all you want, but don't make it personal and stop following me, quoting me every chance you get. And I find bad attitudes, hypocrisy and ignorance disturbing too and you're all three. If you support feminism, you should know that as a man, making it your mission to take down a woman and make her feel bad is wrong. I'm sure you're aware that bullying anyone is unacceptable. So, stop it. You do realise that your hatred towards me has partly made me wonder if I was right to air my opinions around here, if I should have been so forthright, if it's going to make people dislike me. So, congratulations, you have successfully made a women feel like she should refrain from speaking her mind because it only leads to bad things. Think about that for a minute.

I don't know why I'm bothering with someone who's lecturing me about bullying when they made a point of putting my opinion down by bringing up my sexuality. Congratulations on making a young gay person feel like their opinion doesn't matter.

Obviously it was just a joke and wasn't meant to be "picking on you". I thought the emoticon would've made the lighthearted nature of my intentions obvious, but I guess I should've seen that the friction between us combined with your touchiness wouldn't allow it to come across that way. As an artist myself I almost rely on amateur reviewers and bloggers who do it for the love of music. But regardless of this, I predict you'll inform me of my own intentions and tell me I hate women and want to tear them down etc.

I'll say it AGAIN and maybe you'll actually listen this time: "I've never denied your right - or anyone's right - to air an opinion." I've always said this and always will, and have said it to you literally dozens of times. I have no idea why you'd take it upon yourself to question if you could share your opinion due to debating with me, and I wouldn't want that outcome. But I certainly don't feel guilty about it as you'd like me to, due to the fact that my problem with you does not stem from us simply sharing different opinions. I don't know where you got "hatred" from, either.

[Didymus 32,909]

1 hour ago, StrawberryBlond said:

I knew you were going to say all this but I reject it, honestly. It's just an excuse for women to use their oppression as a reason to do whatever they want.

That's just you caricaturizing. I've seen you do the same with issues of race and it's honestly quite concerning. I haven't forgotten you claimed that racism was "easy to solve" (direct quote), your solution being basically what you're presenting now as well: for the groups in the margin to adapt to the standard of the dominant one. I find that very conservative and boring and, when taken from feminism to other fields, alarming. With that same logic homosexuals would still be forced to hide their sexual preferences in public today.

1 hour ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Of course I think reintegration of female sexuality into society is important. But some elements of that sexuality is problematic. Women can be sexually empowered without putting men down and taking on traditional male sexual roles. A woman having the freedom to do whatever she wants sexually, even if that's being submissive, is true sexual liberation. But making part of that liberation be about putting men down? It's not right. Being empowered doesn't mean much if you have to step on someone else to get it.

That's going a bit far. Women actively seeking out sexual pleasure, whether selfish or not, is not equal to stepping on men. I don't even really know who you're talking about. I never met a woman who was only interested in her own sexual pleasure and was excited to abuse men for the purpose. I don't think you have either. Not even my example, Samantha of Sex and the City handled men that way. So I don't really understand what you're talking about here.

I continue to believe there's serious value in cultural products engaging in transgressive language of empowerment. That's the way a status quo is changed. It takes a woman like Madonna to blatantly express her sexual fantasies to remind everyone that every woman has them and maybe they should be expressed. If you actually looked at the Sex book you'll see that Madonna engaged in a variety of sexual acts, from dominant to submissive. So actually she fits the bill nicely.

Now, for the element you take such offense with, the fact that if a grown man wrote fantasies about a teenage girl.. I don't disagree that it would cause a bigger stir than if it were a woman, but you neglecting to mention the reason for that is as predictable as it makes your argument incomplete and unconvincing. The reason people would take issue with a man publicly fantasizing about f-cking a young girl is because his active sexual activity is easily associated with sexual and mental abuse. The associations of strength vs. the weakness of a young girl only add to that. In comparison, an older woman having sex with a younger boy is a reversal of that association. Being penetrated, the active (= passive) sexual role of a woman is submissive by nature, hence the younger boy would be more in control than her, taking the edge off, making it more socially acceptable. After all, the sexual act could not successfully occur if the boy did not have an erection. Important dimension there, not surprised you ignored it, but it shouldn't be.

In fact you could play your cards differently and say that the bias men receive for perfectly normal and healthy fantasies about young girls is rooted in the underappreciation of the female point of view. I would bet that a lot of those fantasies involved the younger girl actively seducing the man, actively desiring the sexual act, overriding the social anxiety of the man. (If it's a rape fantasy, that's different ofc, just like Madonna fantasizing about forcefully shoving a young boy's penis in her vagina would cause the end of her career.) The fact that people don't feel the need to ask questions about the girl's desires in that even hypothetical situation is telling.

Anyway, these subjects are a lot more interesting and complex than you present them. It's bad enough that you have to come up with groups of people and their supposed movements that don't even exist in that way to make your arguments seem valid (i.e. women who are out to abuse men for the sake of selfish sexual pleasure), but your unquestioned acceptance of equally problematic paradigms about male sexuality are even more embarrassing. Of course you did say that those imaginary faux feminists aren't interested in breaking the barriers men suffer from, but you don't seem to be very interested in that as well, which makes me wonder where exactly your allegiance lies. I've called you out for being horribly conservative in the past and you seem to fit the bill in this thread as well.

[StrawberryBlond 13,460]

17 minutes ago, Harry said:

I don't know why I'm bothering with someone who's lecturing me about bullying when they made a point of putting my opinion down by bringing up my sexuality. Congratulations on making a young gay person feel like their opinion doesn't matter.

Obviously it was just a joke and wasn't meant to be "picking on you". I thought the emoticon would've made the lighthearted nature of my intentions obvious, but I guess I should've seen that the friction between us combined with your touchiness wouldn't allow it to come across that way. As an artist myself I almost rely on amateur reviewers and bloggers who do it for the love of music. But regardless of this, I predict you'll inform me of my own intentions and tell me I hate women and want to tear them down etc.

I'll say it AGAIN and maybe you'll actually listen this time: "I've never denied your right - or anyone's right - to air an opinion." I've always said this and always will, and have said it to you literally dozens of times. I have no idea why you'd take it upon yourself to question if you could share your opinion due to debating with me, and I wouldn't want that outcome. But I certainly don't feel guilty about it as you'd like me to, due to the fact that my problem with you does not stem from us simply sharing different opinions. I don't know where you got "hatred" from, either.

I wasn't bullying you when I said that. I brought up a real issue that's affecting 2 oppressed communities and considered if it could be the reason behind the tension between you and me. We talked it out and I admitted I got it wrong and apologised. I don't know how many times I can keep saying sorry. You know I'd never put someone down for their sexuality. I have offered huge support for all sexual orientations on this site, if you'd just look hard enough. I identify as bi-curious myself. Why would I be on here if I didn't like gay people? But just like you think it's ok to criticise women while still being a feminist, I also think it's ok to be supportive of gays but still criticise some attitudes within the gay community that if addressed, could improve it.

Believe it or not, gifs don't always work to make a joke funny when the person you're telling it to feels offended. You think it's lighthearted, I think it's arrogant. Well, if you value the views of amateurs who just review music for the sheer love of it, then why are you so hostile towards me? Just because I don't always agree with your views? Doesn't that contradict with what you said about valuing amateur views?

Sure, you've never explicitly denied my right to an opinion but everytime you rip apart my opinion, make things personal and aim to turn people against me, that is sending the message loud and clear to me that you'd rather I didn't state my opinions, that life would be better at GGD without me here. Naturally, this makes me wonder if I should bother putting my opinions up, knowing that you could see them and say horrible things to me and make me want to cry. I really think you underestimate what an effect you have on me. I live a very lonely life and GGD is one of the few places where I can talk to people outside my family and share my views. This place used to be a real sanctuary for me. But these days, it can feel very hostile when you, and others like you, take it upon yourselves to follow me and are ready to jump on me for any perceived slight. I genuinely find it borderline threatening and wonder if, one day, I might attract the attention of someone really hateful, a real stalker, someone who really wishes ill upon me. This is partly the reason why I've decided pursuing becoming a professional critic isn't the best idea. If I get such a heated response from people on a forum after submitting an amateur opinion, what kind of hate mail would I get if I went pro? I don't think I'm cut out for it. Ultimately, I want people to like me and always speaking so negatively attracts the opposite response, so maybe it isn't for the best. I thought I was strong, but I don't think I really am anymore. So, that's my honest confession about how your criticism of me affects me. I do perceive it as hatred. I'd only go around, following everything someone says in order to bring it down, if I really hated them. Maybe you don't see it that way, but if you'd use some empathy to understand another person's point of view, maybe you'd understand.

9 minutes ago, Didymus said:

That's just you caricaturizing. I've seen you do the same with issues of race and it's honestly quite concerning. I haven't forgotten you claimed that racism was "easy to solve" (direct quote), your solution being basically what you're presenting now as well: for the groups in the margin to adapt to the standard of the dominant one. I find that very conservative and boring and, when taken from feminism to other fields, alarming. With that same logic homosexuals would still be forced to hide their sexual preferences in public today.

That's going a bit far. Women actively seeking out sexual pleasure, whether selfish or not, is not equal to stepping on men. I don't even really know who you're talking about. I never met a woman who was only interested in her own sexual pleasure and was excited to abuse men for the purpose. I don't think you have either. Not even my example, Samantha of Sex and the City handled men that way. So I don't really understand what you're talking about here.

I continue to believe there's serious value in cultural products engaging in transgressive language of empowerment. That's the way a status quo is changed. It takes a woman like Madonna to blatantly express her sexual fantasies to remind everyone that every woman has them and maybe they should be expressed. If you actually looked at the Sex book you'll see that Madonna engaged in a variety of sexual acts, from dominant to submissive. So actually she fits the bill nicely.

Now, for the element you take such offense with, the fact that if a grown man wrote fantasies about a teenage girl.. I don't disagree that it would cause a bigger stir than if it were a woman, but you neglecting to mention the reason for that is as predictable as it makes your argument incomplete and unconvincing. The reason people would take issue with a man publicly fantasizing about f-cking a young girl is because his active sexual activity is easily associated with sexual and mental abuse. The associations of strength vs. the weakness of a young girl only add to that. In comparison, an older woman having sex with a younger boy is a reversal of that association. Being penetrated, the active (= passive) sexual role of a woman is submissive by nature, hence the younger boy would be more in control than her, taking the edge off, making it more socially acceptable. After all, the sexual act could not successfully occur if the boy did not have an erection. Important dimension there, not surprised you ignored it, but it shouldn't be.

In fact you could play your cards differently and say that the bias men receive for perfectly normal and healthy fantasies about young girls is rooted in the underappreciation of the female point of view. I would bet that a lot of those fantasies involved the younger girl actively seducing the man, actively desiring the sexual act, overriding the social anxiety of the man. (If it's a rape fantasy, that's different ofc, just like Madonna fantasizing about forcefully shoving a young boy's penis in her vagina would cause the end of her career.) The fact that people don't feel the need to ask questions about the girl's desires in that even hypothetical situation is telling.

Anyway, these subjects are a lot more interesting and complex than you present them. It's bad enough that you have to come up with groups of people that don't even exist in that way (i.e. women who are out to abuse men for the sake of selfish sexual pleasure), but your unquestioned acceptance of equally problematic paradigms about male sexuality are even more embarrassing. Of course you did say that those imaginary faux feminists aren't interested in breaking the barriers men suffer from, but you don't seem to be very interested in that as well, which makes me wonder where exactly your allegiance lies. I've called you out for being horribly conservative in the past and you seem to fit the bill in this thread as well.

I simplify issues of oppression because oppression is so stupid and could be solved overnight and everyone decided to treat everyone with respect. That's why oppression bothers me so much - it's easy to solve, but you can't get everyone thinking the same way, so it can't happen. And I think you've misunderstood the point I was making. If men are supposedly the dominant group who have it the best, their standards must surely be ones we all want to have, right? But as it turns out, we think some of the standards of the dominant group are weirdly oppressive, so we want to change them. Instead of making it clear that these are issues where the entire human race needs to be treated better, it's seen as just something that women should be granted the right to. You went really far off the mark when you compared it to homosexuals having to keep quiet - that's another humanist issue that all humans need to freed from. In an ideal world, everyone should be free to be who they are, men as well as women. I don't know if I can quite articulate my point that good here, but I hope you get it.

How is it going a bit far? Women feeling empowered through stepping on others is ok to you? If a woman's aim is to get sexual pleasure for herself and herself alone, excluding the man's rights completely, then, yes, she is stepping on him for her own selfish need to empowerment. I'm not talking about a woman in particular. But actually, even Madonna fans have said she is like this. That she has used men throughout her career to get what she wants and that she was all about getting pleasure for herself alone. And they think it's a positive thing. People here have discussed this. I criticised this idea back then and I criticise it now. No one has the right to use someone for sex or lie to get sex or be selfish during sex. It doesn't matter which gender's doing it or the reasoning behind it. It's horrible.

There's nothing wrong with women stating sexual fantasies. However, when those fantasies involve using other people and other questionable behaviour that would get criticised in men, there should be criticism of women too. I did see the pictures in Sex. Yes, she does a mixture of dominant and submissive. But that's not the issue, the issue is her fantasies of using people, including a young boy.

Yes, I know that the reason why men are criticised more for fantasising about young girls is because men tend to be literally stronger than women and their genitalia is made in a way that allows them to be forceful and damaging if they so choose. A woman taking control of a man is different due to being the opposite of those things, so her domination of him isn't seen as serious. The reason why I didn't explain this, leaving it "incomplete and unconvincing," as you put it, is because it was so obvious I felt it didn't need to be explained. It is a myth that a man will feel more in control than a woman, even if she is being the dominant one. I'm sick of this false assumption that an erection is paramount for sex to occur. Yes, being flaccid makes intercourse a lot more challenging, but not impossible. If he remains flaccid, there can be no ejaculation, so the woman doesn't stand a chance of pregnancy and he doesn't feel pleasure, but it's still intercourse occurring. There was a storyline on Desperate Housewives years ago about a man getting drugged so he'd be unconscious but erect so the woman could rape him as she wanted a child but he didn't want to do sex consensually with her. Granted, this is an extremely rare phenomenon, but it could happen, so I applaud the series for daring to go there and they actually cited the event as rape, which was even better. I also read a very brief confession from a man once, saying he was raped by a woman who was physically bigger and stronger than him, but because he's male, it wasn't taken seriously or even seen as rape. Female on male rape is a big taboo and a lot of people don't even believe it's possible due to the erection issue, which I find demeaning and disgraceful. How can we expect women's rights in the aftermath of male rape to improve if we don't bother taking men's rights in the aftermath of a female rape seriously?

Well, sorry, I don't view male fantasies about very young girls to be normal and healthy. There's nothing wrong with finding young girls attractive, but your fantasies should remain age appropriate when you're clearly past a certain point. I wouldn't want an elderly man fantasising about schoolgirls. I find the fetishisation of the young to be very creepy and think it contributes horribly toward people getting bad ideas into their heads and thinking it's ok. You have a point when you say that the bias men receive for it partly comes from underappreciation of the female point of view but this is when it goes into different territory and not quite what we're talking about. Really, I think it all comes from what we just discussed in the paragraph above - we are so used to males being seen as active and dominant in sex and that women have to be protected. Yes, some of these fantasies from men involve the girl seducing and wanting it just as much but there are plenty that are flat-out abusive and don't respect the girl's character in any way and treat her like she's stupid and worthless. You only need to look at all the p0rn that is made by men for men to see how little women are respected in male fantasies.

No, I do think the subjects are interesting and complex, just in different ways. And I have pointed out that women like this do exist (plus, plenty of women now are focusing a lot on role reversals of oral sex, wanting their man to go down on them but not wanting to give anything in return, wanting multiple orgasms but aren't interested in his and generally taking men for granted). And I have pointed out problematic elements of male sexuality, I'm usually the first to bring them up, actually. Well, I hope by now, you are aware that I am interested in improving the lives of men as well and have their issues be taken more seriously. I've made it perfectly clear that I am a feminist and humanist who wants everyone treated with respect and kindness and true freedom for all. I also stand up a lot for issues that go unspoken. I'm not fake at all, I have made my intentions very clear. I'm not conservative, I'm liberal. It's just that so many liberals today are ironically, very close-minded, thinking there can only be one definition of liberalism - free-wheeling with no rules. Making sure everyone is being treated respectfully and not bringing harm onto themselves or others is a big part of my philosophy and that involves me being against some liberal beliefs that I think go too far and do more harm than good. Just because you don't support a liberal standpoint doesn't make you conservative. We need to stop labelling all our beliefs under either group (which leads to them being considered bad or good automatically) as it's very restrictive and not conducive to progress.

[BeautyisaLie 537]

Come on guys, chill out! All of you clearly have a point in this, no need to make this the most commented topic of the week 

[Evan Peters 10,338]

 not this thread turning into another harry vs. strawberry blonde smackdown. can ya'll please stick to private messaging

[FATCAT 56,007]

On 5/22/2016 at 4:01 PM, Bellatrix said:

Well, in most countries eighTEEN is a legal age, even fifTEEN or sixTEEN in some countries.

16 is the age of consent in South Carolina

[Rolodex of Hate 1,721]

5 hours ago, FATCAT said:

16 is the age of consent in South Carolina

Same in UK

[AJH219 4,448]

Did I seriously just read that oppression is a simple issue? What kind of delusional, ignorant, privileged point of view  

[Whispering 18,865]

1 hour ago, AJH219 said:

Did I seriously just read that oppression is a simple issue? What kind of delusional, ignorant, privileged point of view  

If everyone would just join hands and sing kumbaya, all the oppression in the world would magically disappear!