Letters to the Editor
dick dworkin
Published Letters: 691 Editor's Choice: 3
-
I said women are more picky about sex and more easily put off it this can and usually does RESULT IN A SITUATION
[Read the article: The sexual politics of household chores]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]that men want sex more than women. Women can be as intensely sexual as men UNDER THE RIGHT CIRCUMSTANCES, but usually the circumstances are not right.
It is true also that for biological reasons women are instinctively, "selfishly" invested in NON-SEXUAL relationships in a way men are not. This is because female relationships to help other females with their kids are almost as important to reproductive success as a mate. For males on the other hand other males are only real friends if they help each other have the status that will get them women. This is why men are less "deep" at social relationship in general and why womens non sexual friendships can be so twisted and weird, jealous, obsessive, in a way that for men only happens in sexual relationships. Confusion over this difference causes enormous difficulties between men and women.
I'm a little surprised LeCastor that you keep harping on all the distorted science of the past. It seems absurd to argue that because science has been misused and distorted no science can be right if it is related to a sensitive subject. It would be EXACTLY like creationists accepting physics, chemistry, and astronomy but denying evolution and biology. In fact they could use your specific examples to make their case. Actually it isn't LIKE that it actually IS EXACTLY that.
-
If men were sexually put off by obnoxiousness in women as easily as women are put off by obnoxiousness in men sexual relations would cease entirely
[Read the article: The sexual politics of household chores]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]This is why women are so determined to deny the sexual differences between men and women, so they can continue to argue that male horniness and the female lack of it proves that men are obnoxious and coddled by women and society (after all they still want sex) and women are abused (if women were as coddled as men they would be as horny as men so if a woman is one tenth as horny as a man it PROVES that life is 10 times harder for her, she works 10 times as hard, suffers 10 times the physical and emotional abuse, etc.) The fact that ANY MALE has EVER been induced to even pretend to take such insanity seriously is PROOF beyond doubt that women have ALWAYS had ENORMOUS power.
-
the reson china is not india in it's level of economic development
[Read the article: No more babies for you!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]is BECAUSE of the one child policy restraining the growth of the population.
-
a little known fact is that HALF the protein consumed by humans is only able to be produced as a result of chemical nitrogen fertilizer
[Read the article: No more babies for you!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]if people used "natural" methods the human population would have to shrink by two thirds and even that could only survive by using every square inch of arable land on the planet.
-
the only long term question here is:
[Read the article: In India, there's big money in wombs]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]can an artificial womb work, or will the human gestated in on be psychologically lacking in some way due to the absence of physical connection with a real mother during development.
-
no the real victim is the public although most of it deserves what it gets
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]for allowing the existence of a system where anyone who challenges entrenched wealth, and has sex, can be gotten rid of by that entrenched wealth at any time. What is a little weird about this sytem is that it is completely out in the open, everyone can see that the investigation and exposure of sexual pecadillos is highly selective, and when, by accident, republicans are exposed that nothing happens. Yet the media and enough of the public goes along with it anyway.
-
they DON'T have the power to legalize it becaue women, led be feminists (and the Xtian right of course) would vote them out
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm quite sure if an all male referendum were to decide the issue that prostitution would be legal.
-
of course people aren't governed only by their instincts but the real ones usually have influence
[Read the article: The sexual politics of household chores]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]and it's better to look at the facts than to suppress them in service to ideology or politics. Of course some subjects lend themsleves more to direct study and experimentation than others. This doesn't mean that the scientific method is inapplicable but it does affect how easy or hard it is to accumulated evidence which will compel every informed and rational person to accept a conclusion.
-
Every member of NORML has more balls than Eliot Spitzer.
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]and those people can never be elected to anything if they put their views front and center. Do you want to leave govt. in the hands of only the true believing authoritarian fantatics? Other than this your ONLY choice is to accept a division of labor: some people work from the OUTSIDE to change popular but misguided politics/policies and some people are "allowed" to be "hypocrites" so they can get into office. These are the only options.
-
the only reason it's a cash cow for organized CRIME is because sexual hysterics and authoritarian religious fantatics
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]are STUPID enough to make it a crime. Actually it isn't stupidity at all: they CHOOSE to allow organized crime to enrich itself via prostitution because that is a price they are willing to pay(more accurately, to allow OTHERS to pay) to maintain the possibility, so they think, of controlling other peoples sex lives. EVERYTHING that flows from the ILLEGALITY of prostitution is the responsibility of those who make it ILLEGAL. It shouldn't take a genius to get this.
-
that's my point Confucius
[Read the article: No more babies for you!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]we are now stuck with using tech to solve our problems(if they can be solved) whether we want it to be that way or not. We are waaaaaaay past the point where traditional ways of doing things will be able to handle it. Not that they shouldn't be looked at for whatever they can offer of course.
-
So, I'm assuming with your fiancee, if you don't satisfy her the way she wants it, she has license to go find that satisfaction elsewhere, and vice versa?
[Read the article: Quote of the day]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]In practical terms in a modern society EVERY woman who is remotely physically normal has that option ANY TIME SHE WANTS, so what any man thinks about it has no bearing on the situation. It is ONLY men who have to either pay for sex or devote resources of any sort to cultivating a relationship if they want sex.
-
and our crony captialist corrupt wall street overlords are free to go about their business unmolested
[Read the article: STI 911]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]thank God morality isn't dead in the USA.
-
could we agree then that the denunciation campaigns that accompany any discussion of whatever facts there are are a bad thing
[Read the article: The sexual politics of household chores]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]and that the fact that feminists do to researchers into the biological influences on behavior the same thing that global warming deniers do to climate researchers is a bad thing?
-
if the case is innately so weak why can't it be disposed of directly
[Read the article: The sexual politics of household chores]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]why is an overwhelming political and cultural suppression response necessary?
-
if they were interested in reducing the number of abortions they would hand out free birth control and sterilization to anyone who wanted it
[Read the article: More "common ground" on abortion? ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]so whatever they ARE interested in, reducing the number of abortions is NOT it.
-
nobody is going to track the political opinions of pregnant women who get prenatal tests
[Read the article: More "common ground" on abortion? ]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]but since every isolated abortion clinic in a red state has had the experience of having protesters one day come in to get an abortion another it seems very likely that many pro-lifers who don't want a defective baby do the same. Abortion conflicts have nothing to do with babies, banning abortion is ONLY about controlling peoples sexual behavior.
-
it's much more efficient for you to examine a textbook on the subject than it
[Read the article: The sexual politics of household chores]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]is for me to try to recapitulate one here.