| |
|
she was indeed coditioned to be unable to accept your WOMAN friend's interjection - conditioned by what is unclear
do you need to capitalise 'woman'? you keep doing it and i think we all got the point. in fact, if you look, i tried to answer it.
This conditioning is identified as from the same origin as Jack Fear's problems with female rape, but since Jack Fear is not to my knowledge a lesbian feminist this seems a bit of a stretch.
jack fear is a human being, though, and a member of what is often termed 'western society'. the same circumstances can produce different people, especially if these people are of a different gender.
It seems more likely, surely, that the idea that *all* heterosexual sex is violence and the idea that *no* heterosexual sex instigated by women can be violent are two different ideas.
yes, yes it does sem likely. more likely though? than what?
more likely than the assertion of mine that they are in fact the same concept? the asertion which i didnt make?
Let us... no, sorry, I just can't do it. I literally cannot believe that the situation went as you describe it, nor that the world stopped to explain that she and Jack Fear were sisters under the skin.
so call me a liar, or accuse my memory of being bad, and be done with it. i will call you a fabricator for this nonsense about jack needing to be lesbian, if it helps.
i said this determination comes from the same conditioned place as our beliefs, not that the belief that sex is violence is the same as an inabilty to fully accept a female rapist. i said our, and not jack fear's too, if you'll notice. he's not the only one who finds such imaginings difficult.
So, it's a fantasy, one fondly remembered.
i will try to remeber never to reveal my emotions at remembering my friends again, lest it be cast up against me. i see now that it was irrelevant, and as such serves only as basis for your ridicule.
i would suggest that next time you make such statements as
Toksik's attempt to remove the sexual competence of his straw-lady [...]has no coercive elementand no physical expression - it's something like a sexual fantasy -
you are careful to explain that it is only a fantasy because you say so. it happened, and your lack of belief in that is not proof it did not. much in the same way as my asertion it did is not proof of my position either.
perhaps i understand the phrase 'sexual competence' differently also; it at first read seems you are saying i think she is incompetent at sex, whihc i assure you is not and was never the case. i have no idea of her prowess, and i wouldnt think to suggest otherwise.
And, in that fantasy, the relationships of power are restored to a natural footing; the lesbian "feminazi" has been exposed as incapable of understanding how heterosexual sex works, and her ignorance made clear...
well, no.
her ignorance was only 'made clear' in the sense that a question was asked of her understanding, and subsequently answered inadequately. no one badgered her to answer, she was allowed to take other questions without expanding.
i also have not said she was incapable of understanding heterosexual sex. the problem was with her inability to listen to another view on this subject, in this case one from someone with experience of the very act she was describing.
that is not to say there is no chance the lecturer also speaks from experience, but it is to say that hers is unlikely to be the definitive experience.
Now, I may be missing something.
yes.
every time i have said that my friend was not pushing hers as the one and only view, and that the main objection was that the lecturer asserted that there is no way to describe het-sex other than her own.
I have a horrible vision of some poor woman just trying to teach history of radical feminism 101, rather than thumping a tub, but perhaps I am swayed by the idea of a pair of hets laughing about how stupid these feminazis are.
it wasnt 101. it wasnt a history class. she was not thumping any tubs, but neither was she a poor woman teaching sneering hets. the class was a broad mix of sexuality, and mostly female. does that help your mantal image become less upsetting? or will you take my divergence form your assumptions about the day as proof further of my status as a fantasist? |
|
|
