Free speech shouldn't include violent porn

[miz_wright]

McKinnon has been spearheading anti-porn feminism for thirty years or more - this isn't news. She and Dworkin did more with their combined efforts to ensure that women viewed all penatrative sex as analogous to rape.

There are very few women or feminists who hold to this view, by the by.

The second wave and its radical offshoots have been extremely detrimental to the ideas of feminine sex positivity - by taking the view that all m/f sex (or even f/f sex using insertables) is tantamount to rape and that all sexual behaviour that has one partner in a prone position necessarily subjugates that partner (regardless of any potentially negotiated power exchanges, explicit or otherwise), women have been disenfranchised from their own sexuality. The whole topic is one of the most divisive items in the feminist portfolio.

I think it's a straw man argument though, myself, because it hearkens back to the idea that women must be protected for their own good that made sufferage such a difficult fight. And to MY mind, that is completely antithetical to the entirety of the feminist movement and its associated ideals.

McKinnon and her ilk have taken the questionable road that to be feminist is to refute womanhood - and that to make the choice to be submissive in a consensual arrangement is by definition oppressive is faulty at best and dangerous at worst.

Heaven forfend we are provided the ability to make our own decisions and choose for ourselves.

Silly me. I thought that was the whole point.