...I encounter an article that truly baffles me -- not in the sense that it defies my ability to comprehend it, but rather in the sense that I cannot imagine what scheme of government or ethics would permit its author to wander about without a minder. And thus it is today, as I was catching up with a few blog-favorites.
Via Ace of Spades, which points to My Pet Jawa, comes a rant that must be read to be believed:
Just to recall a basic fact: Intercourse/PIV is always rape, plain and simple.
For those of you unacquainted with the latest in "radfem" acronyms, "PIV" is short for penis in vagina.
With many other logical atrocities and cries for psychiatric help, I'd exhort you to read the whole thing, if only for the novelty of the experience. But that first sentence is all you need to know what's coming...or maybe not:
If we compare this to even the crappiest online definition of violence: “behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something”. Bingo. It fits: Pregnancy = may hurt, damage or kill. Intercourse = a man using his physical force to penetrate a woman. Intention / purpose of the act of intercourse = to cause pregnancy. PIV is therefore intentional harm / violence. Intentional sexual harm of a man against a woman through penile penetration = RAPE.
I'd say the author is uninterested in having children, wouldn't you? That's probably just as well. Also, the author's site doesn't offer us a photo of her. At a guess, that's also probably just as well.
I'd thought that sort of misandry and hatred-of-the-natural-self had been completely leached out of feminism some time ago. Apparently I lead a sheltered life.
Just a little something to help you finish waking up.
0 Yorumlar