Alas, the emperor (author, that is) has no clothes … & that is indeed pornographic. The quote by Dworkin is used for what exactly? Her comment is mere assertion: pornography = patriarchy = rape & sexual violence.

Why?

Because….

I’m reminded of last year’s “don’t shame her for wearing shorts, teach boys that girls are not sexual objects” meme, spread largely by young, socially active women & girls, often after running afoul of some school district’s reactionary dress code. Modest attire for girls, they were told, was necessary to prevent boys from being unduly distracted. Naturally, the girls reacted in an understandable way.

But what they didn’t do is ask their male peers if this was really true.

Parents, teachers & school administrators, uncomfortable with girls’ warm weather attire, attempt to pose restrictions, citing the alleged needs of boys. Problem is that this has nothing whatever to do with boys. As someone who attended junior & high school when a very conservative dress code finally bit the dust, I can assure you no boy of any sexual orientation ever complained to his teachers or parents that he couldn’t do his classwork because the girls wore shorts or a tank top.

Never happened.

Boys were a justification, not a cause of the dress code imbroglio.

Thus it is with pornography. Those whom it makes uncomfortable — from Anthony Comstock to Andrea Dworkin — create all sorts of social problems to tag onto it. When all they really have to do is look somewhere else.

LA born & raised, now I live upstate. I hate snow. I write on healthcare, politics & history. Hobbies are woodworking & singing Xmas carols with nonsense lyrics

LA born & raised, now I live upstate. I hate snow. I write on healthcare, politics & history. Hobbies are woodworking & singing Xmas carols with nonsense lyrics