This folks, is a critique of the dominant strain of (neo) liberal thought in our society when it comes to the class of women selling themselves to men for sex.  This is not a individual critique, but rather an indictment of the <em>system</em> that allows the horror of prostitution to exist in the first place.  (There.  I’ve stated it first thing, but I still don’t hold much hope for the lib-fem handmaidens not to somehow turn this into ‘slut-shaming’ *smh*)

The below quote is from Meghan Murphy writing at the Feminist current and essentially says that what we have now (disregard for women as people, incels etc) stems directly from the lib-fem backed notions of ‘sexual-liberation’ and ‘female-empowerment’.  This is her response to a NYT opinion article that has set the liberal feminist twittersphere afire as the grizzly endpoint of their foolishness has become a reality – and that reality is far from good if you happen to be female.


“Douthat doesn’t advocate for a dehumanized and commodified “redistribution of sex,” he just says this is what liberals like Penny and Friedman have fought for and won. Douthat writes:

“… As offensive or utopian the redistribution of sex might sound, the idea is entirely responsive to the logic of late-modern sexual life, and its pursuit would be entirely characteristic of a recurring pattern in liberal societies”

He also rightly points out that our understanding of sex and sexual liberation has been very much shaped by Hugh Hefner — meaning that we have adopted a social value that says men should have access to a wide variety of young, sexualized, one-dimensional women who are always “up for it.”

I suspect part of the problem, beyond their inability to think their way out of a paper bag, is that Douthat called out the zealous efforts of these liberals and leftists to “transform prostitution into legalized and regulated ‘sex work,’” thereby encouraging nouveau-porn technologies like sex robots and the broader notion that men have a right to sex. And beyond that, they did so without “formally debating the idea of a right to sex” or, I’d argue, listening to the masses of feminists who have, over decades, been pointing out that if you want actual sexual liberation for women, you can’t achieve it while simultaneously commodifying sex and saying that it’s acceptable for some women to be treated as sex objects, so long as they are compensated.

Friedman told Vice that “she finds it ‘profoundly appalling’ that The New York Times’ opinion pages would legitimize incel culture under the guise of a debate,” making it clear that she (whether intentionally or unintentionally) missed the point entirely. In fact, it is Friedman and her gaggle of desperate-to-be-cool liberal cronies who focused their careers on trying to legitimize exactly the mindset incels have internalized, and who then lashed out in anger (too-often violently) at the discovery that their fantasy was just that.

I wonder what they thought the end result of fighting for a porn industry and sex trade would be? That men would think, “Gosh, the best way to build relationships with women is through respect and by getting to know them as the humans they clearly are”? Or, rather, would they come to the conclusion that women’s bodies are things that exist to be fucked, and that at any given moment, they should be able to get off, in whatever way they like, regardless of how the woman on the other side of their laptop screen feels about it?”

Bolding mine.  I’m curious my lib-fem friends, what’s your next empowerful move going to be?  Perhaps not catering to men should start to wiggle up the priority list, no?