as long as male sexuality is not identical to female sexuality, or at least as long as men are not forced to behave as though it is, women are not secure and therefore not free so whatever it takes to accomplish this is merely a defense of womens freedom.

You are right about this, the problem is that neither you nor any one else apparently are willing to apply this method to gender issues. The need to justify this refusal is why there is so much political attachment to the idea that all gender is a social construct even though everyone knows it isn't. How else could you justify the refusal.

all freedom in fact is a trade off: if you are free then there is the possibility that you will do something I don't like and vice versa. The only way one person, or one group, can be free of the possibility of being displeaesed by someone else is if everyone else is a slave.

In fact I strongly suspect that because she is a pretty girl Glen feels much sorrier for her than he would feel for a male, pretty or not, in the same situation. I'm not saying there would be NO somewhat similar reaction but I doubt it would be the same, at least it isn't for me. This kind of thing is biologically based, deal with it, denial is pointless.

This is a weird statement. Rather than trying to sort it all out I would think the fact that gay male porn in a huge industry should make it crystal clear to anyone that male sexual interest is what drives the porn industry.

You may not care but law enforcement certainly does. That is why they are constantly busting girls who hook and their customers on craigslist. Outlawing street prostitution and enforcing laws against harassment and letting people conduct their business in private is a great idea and the laws should reflect this understanding that we both have. Unfortunately you and I are in a tiny minority of those who care about the issue.

not just to preserve what a rational person would define as everyones rights but to force everyone to live the way they want them to in order to create a "moral" or in this case "non oppressive to women" society. The virtually universal feminist consensus in favor of using the law to suppress prostitution conducted IN PRIVATE by CONSENTING ADULTS is a perfect example of this mentality which is very little different in its essence, (and at least in one particular i.e heterosexual sex) from that of Moslem or Christian fundamentalists.

I don't think anyone has ever said or implied otherwise. I certainly never have. Where are you getting this.

at all

I don't believe it is true, but it seems that a lot of women do, whether they are willing to acknowledge what the logical consequences of their stated views and policy preferences are is of course an entirely different matter.

NO male porn actor is EVER AllOWED to touch his own dick. If I want to see that I don't have to pay for it.

You're damn right you don't hear men complaining about it when they see this.

I guess you haven't heard: the fields of evolutionary biology or sociobiology, at least as they relate to gender and sexuality in human beings, are ideologies designed to validate traditional gender roles and as such can not possibly have any validity.

what happens when they don't?

and that 31% means he makes the decision she wants him to because you can be SURE that if he ever made a decision she didn't like she would MAKE SURE that neither of them would ever describe the decision making as shared.

it isn't possible to even plausibly pretend that American men exert any control over women, but women are still oppressed by the fact that men don't do everything that women want them to the way that women want them to.

due to the fact that for biological reasons sex/sexual attraction is different for women than for men. The only way that progress could occur, I think, is if EVERYONE involved were able to recognize that THEIR particular emotional responses, while important, are not everything. What are the chances there I wonder.

or are men "unnaturally" hypersexual because they are starved for feminine interaction, or because they are "unnaturally" dominant due to support from their culture or are they just acting like normal men in the absence of an environment where testosterone is "unnaturally" suppressed due to the low social status of men and and the fact that men are inhibited out of fear that their status and prospects will decline even further if they are not. What sort of evidence does exist or can exist that would shed genuine light rather than just a confirmation of preconceived ideas. I CAN think of one aspect of the situation that I think everyone probably can agree is universal and that might serve as a starting point: men, no matter what their beliefs or situation NEVER feel that women are too sexual with them individually, they may feel that women are too sexual in general or with other men but they always have a positive reaction to a female sexual response to them personally, it may be overridden in some cases by fanatical beliefs but it is always there.

then they could refuse to do business with anyone who wasn't REALLY nice to them and the public realm could be as asexual as you would like. The only thing preventing this change from being made are the voters, the majority of whom are women.

since men do have to worry about women responding this way and since it extends to everything in their environment it is MUCH EASIER to let the woman decide everything.

what is modern feminism but women making nonsensical and contradictory demands and men willingly trying to carry them out or else.