“whether or not the woman can coherently object to sex or not. This charge is, obviously, still pervasive in our society and continues to hurt women yet still acceptable.”
except i’m attempting to cut through this. i understand some men use this as a way to excuse their own inexcusable behavior; i do not disagree with you. what i object to is the failure to recognize the fact that this is already transparent, and has been rendered as harmless as it is going to be. the notion that all such sensibilities arise from ideology or conspiracy, however, is mooted by a simple observation of reality: women and men are different with respect to sexual consequences. the social rules will reflect these to some degree. inequality, in this respect as all others, is not ultimately a result of ideology, it is the reflection of reality. i agree that distortions inhere in how this reflection is expressed, but the fact is acting, dressing, behaving like a woman who does not seem to respect these underlying dynamics, which everyone can feel and does feel, is recognized as such on an animal level. it may not mitigate or excuse criminality, but why is it objectionable to point out that it does contribute to it? After all, the men involve ought not be absolved of their role in it either.
