I’d really appreciate it if you could speak to your remark about Male Sexuality, since you ARE the one who brought it up. Like I said initially, I’m confused. Lay it out for me. You’re the expert. (I really don’t get why only one guy tried to answer it, and the rest went all apeshit and tried to be cute).

WHY is an image necessary for a man to masturbate? A corollary to that question is why is he entitled to use a real woman’s image, but one thing at a time.

Hardly. There was no “personal attack”; porn is all okay, right?

No kidding, Cara. How could the assumption that a man needs porn in order to stoke the Power of his Male Sexuality*, if such an assumption had even been made, be construed as a “personal attack” if there’s nothing wrong with porn?

*I love the reverent capitalization, by the way. Pure genius.

Rape apologist, plausible deniability will get you nowhere. As if Catholics aren’t misogynist.

No, just Catholic. You’re identifying yourselves quite well.

I do love the convulsions currently being displayed. Carry on.

(I know, I know–you can be more “objective” about it, right? So unfair that you don’t get to define all women’s experience, since you can see our lives so much more clearly than we can).

Fascinating. I haven’t made any comment about my own sexual activity above, and yet assumptions about this are what you choose to target in personal attacks.

Very telling.

Hardly. There was no “personal attack”; porn is all okay, right?

You’re bent out of shape because some women expressed their own opinions on the subject. Why? It’s all okay, right?

You’re working overtime trying to catch some discrepancy in what’s been said. Your lack of reading comprehension is not our problem. Your oblique “gotcha” remarks are pretty funny, since they don’t say anything and you haven’t tripped anyone up. Kind of difficult to win an argument when nobody’s arguing, but go ahead and keep trying, if you want to.

You’re eager to have something specific said to “draw the discussion to a close.” Why? You can bail out any time. Porn’s all good. Right? It’s all okay, and those of us with other opinions are just mean or manhating. So what’s the problem?

I haven’t made any comment about my own sexual activity above, and yet assumptions about this are what you choose to target in personal attacks.

Very telling.

HA!

That you chose to interpret what was a generic ‘you’ as something specific to yourself is even more telling.

The sentence was directed at you, yes, but the ‘you’ contained within the sentence was generic.

So, you know, when I say all porn is exploitative, I don’t have to have a particular porn “star” in mind, oh, rape apologist of stunted reading comprehension.

It’s just that, when those conditions are met, you won’t even want your precious porn.

Oh, and “Little Sisters”? Misogynist.

Fascinating. I haven’t made any comment about my own sexual activity above, and yet assumptions about this are what you choose to target in personal attacks.

Very telling.

Didn’t think so.

But at least we’ve established that your stance is thatt porn is bad, regardless of whether it expolits women, and regardless of whether it contains misogynistic elements.

You appear to be stating that any porn - presumably any picture of the naked body, male or female, used by gays, straights or bis for salacious purposes - is ontologically misogynist.

I wish the Little Sisters could have sorted that right out from the start rather than throwing red herrings about valid objections based on exploitation or, you know, misogyny in porn. It would have saved so much time.