Women: the Price for Watching Porn, is Rape, say Feminists.

[dolfette]

because this guy is a classic avoid other men operator.

you're quite observant.

 

[dolfette]

I am not a troll. I resent the accusation.

i'm entirely unconvinced.
and i don't care if you resent that.

your attitudes are grotesque.

 

[B_hunghealinglover]

Your position makes the implication clear.

http://www.lpsg.org/268090-amazing-pictures-5.html#post3727455

My position is clear, as I stated in the linked post above : -

"Nobody is saying [women are asking for it]. To suggest that would be hideously offensive to victims."

Those were my words, and I stand by them. They are the opposite of what you claim. You are accusing me of saying things I have not said.

 

[Kotchanski]

http://www.lpsg.org/268090-amazing-pictures-5.html#post3727455

My position is clear, as I stated in the linked post above : -

"Nobody is saying [women are asking for it]. To suggest that would be hideously offensive to victims."

Those were my words, and I stand by them. They are the opposite of what you claim. You are accusing me of saying things I have not said.

One protest to the contrary does nothing to undo the rest of your content.

Trying to push that is about as moronic as anything starting with "I'm not a racist, I have a black friend"

 

[B_hunghealinglover]

One protest to the contrary does nothing to undo the rest of your content.

In which case, can you find a single instance where I do state, categorically, that "women are asking for it"? Can you provide a link to it in this thread?

 

[D_Sam Rockswell]

Be careful! Given that all men are rapists, there may be some who are driven to abuse women who make intelligent comments on message boards.

...............You might wanna re-edit that statement..........................................like now.

 

[dolfette]

do you not understand the word 'implication'?

 

[Kotchanski]

In which case, can you find a single instance where I do state, categorically, that "women are asking for it"? Can you provide a link to it in this thread?

And we're back to the whole not reading thing again...

I said you implied it, not that you categorically stated it. You'd get along a lot better in these threads if you'd get your sexist head out of your ass long enough to see the words on the screen.

 

[B_hunghealinglover]

And we're back to the whole not reading thing again...

I said you implied it, not that you categorically stated it. You'd get along a lot better in these threads if you'd get your sexist head out of your ass long enough to see the words on the screen.

So, the fact I state, cleary, that "women are asking for it" is NOT what I believe, doesn't address the fact that you simply IMAGINE that is what I've said.

You seem to be mistaking fantasy for reality, then.

 

[Endued]

So I went through the articles and I didn't once see a justification/clarification for the quote in the title. Did I just miss it or was it not there?

I had to laugh at this bit though:

“Women can still become addicted to pornography in the same way that men do,” said Douglas Weiss, a licensed psychologist and executive director of Heart to Heart Counseling Center in Colorado Springs. “I do think that the partial reason for this is women becoming more intelligent about usage of the Internet — going online and chatting, developing relationships and acting out sexually.”

He seems genuinely surprised at how women can display the same characteristics as men. Hold the front page!!!

 

[dolfette]

So, the fact I state, cleary, that "women are asking for it" is NOT what I believe, doesn't address the fact that you simply IMAGINE that is what I've said.

You seem to be mistaking fantasy for reality, then.

there seem to be very few people in this thread who follow your version of reality.

 

[B_hunghealinglover]

there seem to be very few people in this thread who follow your version of reality.

Actually, I think we all agree that the Feminist Professor Mary Anne Layden, who wants us to believe that "The more pornography women use, the more likely they are to be victims of non-consensual sex" is an absolute idiot.

Apart from that, it seems some people are more intent on making up things I haven't said and believing them, than looking at the actual words on the page. That's a funny version of reality to follow...

 

[dolfette]

Apart from that, it seems some people are more intent on making up things I've said and believing them, than looking at the actual words on the page. That's a funny version of reality to follow...

i think you need this link.
Dictionary.com | Find the Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com
there are a few words you can look up.
i suggest you start with 'implication'.

...unless you can post a link to where somebody has categorically stated that you used a specific phrase or word which you did not use.

the other alternative is that you are deliberately pretending to be incredibly and offensively stupid in order to frustrate and upset other posters.

i'm inclined towards the latter.

 

[B_hunghealinglover]

i suggest you start with 'implication'.

...unless you can post a link to where somebody has categorically stated that you used a specific phrase or word which you did not use.

We can discuss what words "imply" forever, and it's very much down to subjective interpretation - just like analysing poetry. Meanings of specific words can be pondered over for hours, and new depths of possible understanding discovered, many of which were undoubtedly not what the author intended.

However, when something is categorically stated, meanings become clear.

I stated categorically that I don't think "women are asking for it" - when they wear short skirts, or when they watch porn - and I, personally, can honestly say I've never raped a woman in my life, even when she has done BOTH these things. This makes my position clear.

But some people are more interested in what they IMAGINE I might have said.

 

[dolfette]

We can discuss what words "imply" forever, and it's very much down to subjective interpretation - just like analysing poetry. Meanings of specific words can be pondered over for hours, and new depths of possible understanding discovered, many of which were undoubtedly not what the author intended.

However, when something is categorically stated, meanings become clear.

I stated categorically that I don't think "women are asking for it" - when they wear short skirts, or when they watch porn - and I, personally, can honestly say I've never raped a woman in my life, even when she has done BOTH these things. This makes my position clear.

But some people are more interested in what they IMAGINE I might have said.

i can say now,
i do not think you're a mouth breathing loser!
...considering the content of my other posts,
how much value does my statement have?
...rhetorical question. i know the answer.
it has the same value as your self quotation.

 

[B_hunghealinglover]

i can say now,
i do not think you're a mouth breathing loser!
...considering the content of my other posts,
how much value does my statement have?
...rhetorical question. i know the answer.
it has the same value as your self quotation.

That reads like poetry.

I guess I can make it mean whatever I want...

 

[MickeyLee]

http://www.socialcostsofpornography.org/Layden_Pornography_and_Violence.pdfthe original paper, 64 pages worth, the quote was pulled from.
some of it's interesting, some of it ain't.

side reading

 

[Phil Ayesho]

“The more pornography women use, the more likely they are to be victims of non-consensual sex.” - Mary Anne Layden (professor of sociology and women’s studies, Wheelock College, in Boston)

Feminists say women who watch porn get raped | Our Porn, Ourselves

Opinions?

Bullshit.

In point of fact, actual studies suggest the exact opposite... the increasing porn use by people of both genders REDUCES the incidence of rape.

There is a definitive bias among feminists that equates sexuality with women's victimhood.

This is, essentially, no different than the Madonna/Whore complex that has long plagued the western world in its attitudes toward female sexuality.
On a very subtle level, it is the suggestion that there IS No Such Thing as appropriate male sexuality... and that any time women indulge in, or take advantage of "men's" sexual appetites, that women encourage the victimization of themselves.

It really is blaming women for enjoying their sexuality, or for enjoying or capitalizing on the fact that men enjoy their sexuality.

A form of sexual self loathing among feminists that reminds me of closeted republican homosexuals, passing anti-gay legislation, in between visits to the gloryhole at the bathouse.

 

[B_hunghealinglover]

Bullshit.

Absolutely.

Earlier in the year, a Toronto police officer suggested to a group of ten students, that provocative dress might put women at risk from sexual assault. As it happens, he was right - as recent events in Boston indicate - but despite this he was accused of "victim-blaming", and it caused a world-wide feminist protest movement, known as Slut-walks.

And yet here a Feminist Professor publishes an entire paper in which she asserts that women who watch porn put themselves at risk from sexual assault. "Victim-blaming" again: but where is the world-wide feminist protest movement against this? A Porn-walk, perhaps?

I'm fairly certain that if a man had said the same thing, feminists around the globe would be crying for his blood. But since it is a feminist herself who has said this, other feminists simply say, "oh, she's not a real feminist".

But she's a Feminist Professor - you can't get more feminist than that, surely? Perhaps those that decry this woman are not the real feminists, then?

 

[Kotchanski]

Absolutely.

Earlier in the year, a Toronto police officer suggested to a group of ten students, that provocative dress might put women at risk from sexual assault. As it happens, he was right - as recent events in Boston indicate - but despite this he was accused of "victim-blaming", and it caused a world-wide feminist protest movement, known as Slut-walks.

Thank you, at least now you're being honest with yourself and us.

You previously attest to hold the belief that in the particular case in Boston, the officer had every right to take the steps he did because there was an immediate danger to those women. Further claiming that you do not believe women dressing a certain way should not seen as "asking for it"

Here however, you're turning on your heels to use the example in Boston to claim this officer in Toronto had every right to do the same when there was no immediate danger.

So your beliefs aren't as situation based as you'd like us to believe, you just happen to have a specific example at hand to back up your misogynistic opinions.