Ross Douthat revealed the hypocrisy in liberal feminist ideology, and they’re pissed

This is the future that liberals want.

Alek Minassian mowed down and murdered 10 pedestrians with a van in Toronto, most of whom were women.

This week, the liberal feminist internet exploded into bewildered anger over a column by Ross Douthat in The New York Times, which pointed out the obvious: that in a world that has placed an incredible amount of value on sex, that has glorified capitalism and turned almost everything into a sellable product, and that has told people (men, in particular) that sex is an inalienable right, inevitably we will arrive in a world that commodifies sex, and seeks to find a way to offer sex to anyone that wants it. I’m stretching his argument to add my own analysis, of course, but essentially this is the point he made: this is the world we live in — the world we created.

Liberal feminism let out an immediate and unified shriek at having to contend with the fact that their purported hatred for incels (which describes a group of men who are “involuntarily celibate”) and other men who communicate their anger at having not been offered the thing porn culture told them they were entitled to (sex with hot, young, porny women) did not mesh with their efforts to normalize and legalize men’s access to women’s bodies in the sex trade.

Jaclyn Friedman, author of Unscrewed: Women, Sex, Power and How to Stop Letting the System Screw Us All and co-editor (with Jessica Valenti) of Yes Means Yes: Visions of Sexual Power and a World Without Rape, tweeted: “CAN PEOPLE JUST STOP FUCKING SAYING THE PHRASE ‘REDISTRIBUTION OF SEX’ LIKE IT IS AN ACTUAL THING. Sex is not a commodity. Women are not a commodity. Sex workers are not a commodity. Sex is an ACTIVITY. You can’t ‘redistribute’ sex any more than you can ‘redistribute’ dancing.”

Despite Friedman’s usually effective use of Caps Lock, her argument doesn’t follow. Particularly because she is one of those who advocates to legalize and normalize the purchase of sex, meaning that indeed she believes men should have the right to access women’s bodies and should have the right to sex, anytime they wish, so long as they can pay and so long as a woman needs the money.

The sex industry literally commodifies sex and women. This is what a commodity is: a service or product that can be exchanged, bought, or sold on the market. Even if you choose to believe sex is a “service” just like physiotherapy or a manicure, if you are paying, it is a commodity. If you are going to argue that sex is not a commodity and to present it as such is Not A Good Thing, you are going to have to admit that radical feminists have been right all along, and that turning women and sex into things to be bought and sold is indeed a dangerous thing.

Similarly, Laurie Penny, who also advocates for the legalization of pimps, johns, and brothels, insisted that “Sexual redistribution’ isn’t a thing. The reason for this is that sex is not a commodity but a relation between human beings,” adding, “(Which is also, sometimes, a service performed for money.)”

While Douthat’s column may well have been convoluted, and while he was unclear about what his own perspective is on what is sadly an inevitable reality (he later clarified on Twitter that he feels this approach is “bad”), those who responded angrily at the notion of a “redistribution of sex” laid bare their own hypocrisy, which is arguably worse than writing an unnecessarily complex column with too long sentences (I am guilty of this today, as well, and am sorry) and coming off as a bit pompous as a result. If you read the piece about four times over, you’ll start to get the gist.

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?

Douthat writes:

“I expect the logic of commerce and technology will be consciously harnessed, as already in pornography, to address the unhappiness of incels, be they angry and dangerous or simply depressed and despairing.”

When you argue that a sex trade must exist in order to serve the “lonely,” “anti-social,” or “sexually unfulfilled,” you shouldn’t be surprised when that world appears in front of you. And certainly you shouldn’t be surprised when men accept your arguments and run with them.

Meghan Murphy
Meghan Murphy

Founder & Editor

Meghan Murphy is a freelance writer and journalist. She has been podcasting and writing about feminism since 2010 and has published work in numerous national and international publications, including New Statesman, Vice, Al Jazeera, The Globe and Mail, I-D, Truthdig, and more. Meghan completed a Masters degree in the department of Gender, Sexuality and Women’s Studies at Simon Fraser University in 2012 and lives in Vancouver, B.C. with her dog.

Like this article? Tip Feminist Current!

$
Personal Info

Donation Total: $1

  • Gundog

    “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”

    Good article. These incel dudes just baffle me. I don’t claim to hold the answers to bring peace between the sexes, but I’m pretty sure I’m closer to it than these jack wagons.

    I would appreciate if you could expand the above argument. I am curious as to what sexual liberation for women would look like without commodification attached to it. I view the commodification of sex as being part and parcel with liberation. I don’t think it is disputable that women have more sexual liberation now (from a North American perspective) than at any time in the past, but yes, admittedly with negative outcomes as well. I tend to believe that more freedom leads to better progress and overall outcomes even if there are other consequences.

    Also based on the premise that men will inevitably reach the lowest common denominator if sex is commodified (paraphrasing – and in partial agreement with), wouldn’t that mean that men would also roll back to extreme Victorian protectionism if it wasn’t? Are you proposing to fix a fundamental flaw in men? If so, how? Or are you suggesting some future sci-fi third way to continue the species (which sounds like it is leading into sex robot territory)?

    • kfwkfw

      “but yes, admittedly with negative outcomes as well” well, are the positive outcomes worth the negative? Making sex a capitalistic thing has so many problems attached to it.

      The negatives are REALLY fucking bad & the vulnerable & voiceless will be the most affected by it. Can you consciously stand by & only amplify a certain circle of people’s voices, versus the voiceless? Accepting prostitution as a thing that must exist is telling women, accept your place, don’t expect it to get better.

      Suggestion is to treat females as human beings.

      • Gundog

        I don’t know if it was worth it. That’s what I’m asking. I’m a dude born during the Carter administration. It seems to me that many, likely a majority, of women have it better now than 1920, but I don’t know that for a fact. The world is not perfect and all suffering will never be stopped. The question really becomes what has the least negative consequences (and as I asked above what alternate way forward is there).

        Unless you can neutralize the sex drive of men aka demand, I can’t see the possibility of prostitution aka supply not existing. It’s economics, not misogyny. Prohibition never works. Some dudes will always want sex and some women will always be willing to exchange sex for money. It’s too lucrative. Especially if the supply shrinks.

        • Julie Katz

          “The question really becomes what has the least negative consequences”

          Really, you can’t answer that question? The answer to that is easy and obvious: ending prostitution has the least negative consequences and the greatest positive outcomes. It’s so freaking obvious. The only negative consequence to ending prostitution is that men won’t be able to pay for sex–no one is chopping off dicks, or denying them the right to masturbate, or preventing them from improving themselves so the women they like will like them, or accepting (being grateful for even) women who are fat ugly losers just like they are. I don’t see any real harm in that, do you? Can you really prioritize the ability of men to pay for sex above the rights of little girls not to have a fat ugly violent guys raping them? Because that’s what prostitution actually is–fat ugly violent guys who rape little girls and women who are desperate and have no other options to get food to eat. You know that right?

          The whole if men don’t have prostitutes they’ll go rape women thing doesn’t hold a bit of water. Men have the absolute ability to not rape, so it’s not some inevitability that can’t be modified by actually punishing the men who rape. Would you like me to stand outside primary schools handing out joints to 12 year olds as a way of preventing them from using heroin? Or maybe if men are so unable to not rape we should be castrating them before puberty, saving some of the sperm cryogenically? Because if men really are unable to restrain themselves from raping women, we should be having serious discussions about suppressing the male sex drive medically, just as we would suppress hallucinations in a psychotic to prevent them from hurting themselves or others.

          Least negative consequence… Jeez, you XY types have some seriously fucked up ideas of who suffers negative consequences on this blue planet.

          And re: better than 1920–ya, sure, we can vote for a bunch of men now, whoopie! But it’s still 1920 for the girls who are still being married off to old men–in the US, Canada, France, England, etc, as well as in the usual hell holes for all women in Eastern Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and that we’re still being murdered and raped and harassed by men, probably a whole lot more than 1920 if you actually look at the numbers. You’d see it ain’t so rosy over her in XX land if you’d look up from gazing on your dicks long enough to notice.

        • Tinfoil the Hat

          Knew it. Just another dude who’s aaaallll about his dick.

          Notably absent in your “arguments” is the notion that women have sex drives, that women want to have sex, that women deserve to have enjoyable, respectful sex.

          If it were “economics, not misogyny,” male prostitutes would be plentiful, and women would be heavy purchasers.

          The fact thst you view women as a “supply” for men’s use speaks volumes about what a misogynist you are.

        • Hekate Jayne

          You said:
          “Unless you can neutralize the sex drive of men aka demand, I can’t see the possibility of prostitution aka supply not existing. It’s economics, not misogyny. Prohibition never works. Some dudes will always want sex and some women will always be willing to exchange sex for money. It’s too lucrative. Especially if the supply shrinks.”

          Male economics is BUILT on misogyny. Male economics insures that there will be a hierarchy with a class of people at the bottom, and males insure that the majority of those will be women with few or no options.

          Knowing that male economic systems withhold basic necessities, and base opportunity and advantages on a male scale of who is “deserving”, and then limiting the opportunities of basic survival, males are using force of government to create a caste of women for them to pay to rape.

          So, of course, you can’t envision a world where everyone has basic needs met. Most males can’t envision it because males don’t WANT IT. Males only understand how to dominate and use force and threat of violence.

          In patriarchy, of course there will always be a class of women “choosing” to sell themselves to males as fuck toy commodities because MALES CREAT THE “CHOICE”. Males create the system where women are paid less, women are forced to give birth, women are saddled with childcare and all domestic responsibility with little or no help from males, who are just as culpable. So when women need food, or medicine, or rent money, or basic needs that they can’t meet, then you oh so fucking generous doods line up and tell them that it will be ok, as long as they choose to suck your fucking dick for the cash that they so desperately need.

          I used to think that males just lacked the ability to think creatively. That males are able to understand how we could all be living a better life.

          But now I understand that you are just manipulative and dangerously selfish and stupid. Look at your fucking post, about how it’s just too lucrative and males will have “demand” for sex (aka female bodies).

          What you are really saying is that DUDE’S WILL ALWAYS OBTAIN ACCESS TO FEMALE BODIES FOR FUCKING BECAUSE ECONOMICS! DEMAND! LUCRATIVE! And of course you completely ignore the male systems that create and perpetuate impoverished women and pretend that they just don’t exist.

          Didn’t your wife just have a baby? And wasn’t it a girl? Perhaps you should encourage her into this lucrative, totally chosen career path. Because hey! Negative consequences, derpderp, male logicks, derpderp duh.

          • Cassandra

            This is such an excellent comment.

          • Anthocerotopsida

            “I used to think that males just lacked the ability to think creatively.”
            Men are so boring and unimaginative. Soooo boorrring. Uuugh! And all the dudes in this thread are perfect examples of it. Like, you can’t think of anything else to do with your sex drive except to abuse prostitutes? Have cold showers gone out of fashion?
            And all these whiny, disingenuous dudes carrying on about how important sex is, how life is meaningless without sex, so women must submit whether we want to or not. It’s making me realize how uninteresting sex really is. Calm down boring guys, you will literally be fine.

        • Hekate Jayne

          Oh, and whenever you doods refer to prohibition being a big failure.

          FIRST, prohibition refers to objects. You know, guns, drugs, etc. So you are viewing women as literal things.

          Secondly, prohibition does work. There is a reason why male Americans kill thousands of people with guns each year, and other countries don’t have this issue anywhere near the scale that we do.

          But most of us know that doods can’t deal with facts or reality. Maybe get your head out of your fucking ass.

        • Eva Jasmena

          People will always want to steal or murder. Is the solution to legalize these?

          By criminalizing the buying of sex, we provide a deterrent that will have a similar effect to that of criminalizing murder or theft: it will at least reduce its occurrence.

          What do we do with abusive people who pose a risk of murder? What do we do with kleptomaniacs? Outside of the law, we can provide them with therapy. But once they act on it, then we need legal deterrence. People might always molest children. Do we decriminalize it because we can’t prevent it? Before a person molests a child, we can offer therapy. Will criminalizing the buying of sex end the trade? Not necessarily. But for those who still feel the urge, they too can seek therapy before they act out on it. Once they act out on it, their actions should be criminally sanctioned.

        • Jani

          “It’s economics, not misogyny”

          Huh??!! In my part of the world, in Europe, there is no “prohibition”. The brothels of the Netherlands and Germany are full of trafficked women and girls you from poorer Eastern European countries and other parts of the world where poverty is rife. They make money for the brothel owners whilst their bodies are abused over and over on a daily basis in return for subsistence money. They’re hardly “willing” participants.

        • Anthocerotopsida

          I once heard a story (I don’t know if it’s true or not) about a guy who wanted sex. Like, he was really horny and stuff. But there wasn’t anyone around who wanted to have sex with him. And the thought to hire a prostitute didn’t even cross his mind because he, like, had a conscience or something. So then he just washed some dishes and went to bed. I forget how the story ends though. I think he survived, but I could be wrong. He might have been permanently disfigured? Sorry, I hope this doesn’t give you nightmares.

      • Hekate Jayne

        You say:
        “Can you consciously stand by & only amplify a certain circle of people’s voices, versus the voiceless? ”

        This is the entirety of male systems, in a single statement.

    • Tinfoil the Hat

      Lemme guess: you’re a man.

      • Hekate Jayne

        He is an MRA masquerading as a sea lion.

        He needs us to explain and describe endlessly, because he just can’t see how males can live without sex and how he really, really is trying super duper hard, tho, working nights and weekends, to attempt to understand the totally confusing and foreign concept that women may actually be human and not the incubator/menstruator/blow job givers that males convince each other that we are.

        His brain cells (both of them)are in danger of dying from the strain of this impossible concept.

        But we need to keep explaining. Because eventually, it will work.

  • marv

    The old adage rings true, ‘be careful what you wish for’.

    It’s odd how liberals often revile faith based beliefs as irrational yet liberals lack reason and rely on faith. Mind atrophy? You have clearly exposed them.

    • acommentator

      It’s odd how liberals often revile faith based beliefs as irrational yet liberals lack reason and rely on faith.

      Some argue that all of this is just a new faith, or a faith type substitute. The below is not a feminist analysis, certainly, but it shows that a wide spectrum of opinion is paying attention:

      https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/intersectionality-the-dangerous-faith/

  • sim3

    YES Meghan! Brava!

    • Meghan Murphy

      Thanks sister!

  • Meghan Murphy

    This is a true and good point, actually.

  • Luckynkl

    The RF critique of pornography and the sex trade doesn’t have anything to with sex, individuals’ attitudes about sex, or morality. RFs critique hierarchies and the power differentials between those that have power and those that have been disenfranchised from power by patriarchal construction based on sex and ideas on sexuality and how those ideas naturalize, legitimize, and perpetuate institutionalized sexism and violence against women

  • Eva Jasmena

    I believe that a balance exists between sexual freedom and sexual protection in the law. To take an example, should porn, prostitution, BDSM, and everything else short of sexual assault become legal, then unless a victim of sexual assault can prove the actual assault (which usually is not easy to prove and perpetrators know it and exploit it), then there is no other recourse. This provides little disincentive against sexual assault since it’s so difficult to prove. If prostitution and other such activities become criminalized, then though those can be difficult to prove too, they might be easier to prove. They give a prosecutor at least a few more venues to explore. For example, if the prosecutor can’t prove sexual assault, maybe they can prove paying for sex or something else instead.

    I see it as a spectrum. The state can grant either more sexual freedom at the expense of protection or protection at the expense of freedom. Personally, I think the law has taken sexual freedom to far and it’s time to re-calibrate in favour of more protection. The state needs to find the right balance between the two.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Thanks Margaret!

  • Meghan Murphy

    Right.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I hope young liberals/third wavers are questioning… I fear they will continue to compartmentalize, though… We’ll see.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Thank you, sister!

  • Meghan Murphy

    xoxo

  • Americus91

    I have a near constant drive to punch people in the throat on a daily basis yet I somehow manage to overcome the urge.

    • FierceMild

      Sometimes I can’t repress that urge and I have to stay home.

  • Hekate Jayne

    I love how he is all “unless you can neutralise demand…..”

    YOUR BONER IS NOT MY PROBLEM TO NEUTRALIZE, DUDEBRO.

    And I promise that we can absolutely neutralize boners. But I am pretty sure that males actually don’t want us to literally do that.

    • Jani

      “I love how he is all “unless you can neutralise demand…..”

      LMFAO!
      Like access to a woman’s body just because a dude has an erection is some sort of human right. You know what follows on from this, if it wasn’t for the sex trade more women would be raped. The notion that porn and prostitution make the streets safer for the “nice” women because a segment of the population is reserved for legal rape.

  • Hekate Jayne

    No one is answering you because your premise is idiotic and false.

    Prostitution is not a fucking side effect of sexual liberation. You are conflating them because males WANT prostitution to be an effect of sexual liberation. Just because you want it doesn’t make it so.

    Like all males you decide that a premise will benefit you, so you work backwards from what you want. Like doing the scientific theory in reverse. Otherwise known as manlogicks.

    • Jani

      Military crusade! LMFAO at that one.

      • Hekate Jayne

        Ending prostitution is LITERAL WAR.

        I give him props for not working in a mention of his boner and opting for a male violence reference of war, instead. Violence and their dick seem to be their only points of reference.

      • Wren

        What a thought!! The military charges in to all the brothels, lines up the men and sends them to work camps. How sad would I be? (not at all)

    • Wren

      Well prostitution is an effect of men’s sexual liberation, which happened at the beginning of civilization, apparently.

      Makes me think of the Handmaid’s Tale when Commander Waterhouse takes June to the brothel and June is surprised. Duh June, OF COURSE THERE’S A BROTHEL.

      • Hekate Jayne

        Any advancement that has ever been made around women and sex is given the appearance of being for us, but it is actually for males.

        Birth control is actually for males. Birth control removes a barrier for males to get sex because now, we don’t have to get pregnant. And they don’t have to use a condom. No excuses about pregnancy. Abortion access is much the same.

        Sexual liberation wasn’t about our ability to control our own bodies and sex life. It was about dudes trying to make it harder for us to say no.

        And you are right, prostitution has been around forever. Because males have always been entitled shits. It comes down to one thing, and that is that whenever males pretend to allow us something, whatever it is will actually benefit them in some way. Otherwise, they wouldn’t do it.

        Even voting wasn’t for us. We were given the vote because immigrants were flooding into the country at that time, and white dudes figured that they could get themselves 2 votes if they allowed their women to vote, and outvote all of those not white dudes.

  • Meghan Murphy

    They are angry at being ‘rejected’ by ‘Staceys’.

  • Hanakai

    Go do your own research. I am not here to serve or educate you.

    • Jani

      So sad to see someone so dumb as to believe in those so-called exit statements on porn videos. Those women don’t get paid unless they say all that shit and it’s all scripted for them anyway. It fuels the myth that women who “love fucking” think it’s a great way to make a shitload of money. Who makes the billions in the porn industry? That’s right! The production companies and the content owners who are overwhelmingly…. men!!

  • Eva Jasmena

    What incels are you talking about? Firstly, there are both men and women who identify (or at least identified) as incels. In fact, a woman invented the word to describe herself.

    Secondly, there are sane and insane incels. For the insane, we need to explore educational and therapeutic options to help them not want to rape or kill and criminal sanctions to deter them. Since the legal sanctions are already in place, then we need to explore what we can do in terms of mental-health policy to help them learn to live without sex.

    • therealcie

      There are no “sane and insane incels.” There are people who may want to be in a sexual relationship but are unable to find one. They may be frustrated and angry, but they do not rape or kill anyone. Incels believe they are entitled to sex. Forget needing “to explore what we can do in terms of mental health policy to help them learn to live without sex.” People who believe they are entitled to other people’s bodies and who rape and kill should be in jail. I want mental health policy to help the millions of non-violent people who live with psychiatric conditions and can’t afford treatment.

    • Tobysgirl

      You don’t need mental-health policy to learn to live without sex. All you need is a HAND.

  • Hekate Jayne

    Have you ever read incel sites? Their entire premise is that the world is full of 20 year old, thin, blond, virgins that love giving blow jobs, and those specific girls (aka as staceys) are all fucking a few dudes known as chads.

    Did you know that Elliot Rodger targeted a sorority house because it was full of (what he was convinced were) staceys?

    Incels do not recognize any other woman as existing.

    I can believe that you didn’t know that. But honestly, telling Meghan that you think she “got it wrong” is a dickhead thing to do. Especially when a very rudimentary Google search would prove that she did fucking research and she learned what she was talking about before she published it. As she usually does.

    I know that you are a dude. And you know better. That never stops you guys, though.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Yes sorry, I actually didn’t read Tinfoil’s comment carefully, and edited my response.

    • acommentator

      Yes, I figured that was what it was, because in your discussion of his article it was clear you understood where he was coming from. I was intending to respond to Tinfoil.

      I can see how one could get confused, though. That was not his best effort, coherence wise. My guess is it started out longer, and a lot got lost in editing it down.

  • FierceMild

    You speculate that the article is speculation and on the strength of that guess you feel free to rebuke the author for a lack of understanding and compassion. Let me guess; you’re male.

  • Jani

    Absolutely. Female sexuality in today’s culture is defined very much in service to make sexuality. It is a sexuality defined by male hegemony. Many men are clueless about female sexuality and it depresses me that 40 years on from the Hite Report, many women are faking orgasm just to perform for men in the cliched manner of a porn video, the shit men wank to. It’s also one way to end bad sex with a lousy lover — not my idea of sexual “freedom” or “liberation”.

  • FierceMild

    I felt the same way. Even when you think a man is at least trying…the one thing they never fail at is disappointing us.

  • FierceMild

    If women were using their sex drives there would be no need for money. It is precisely because a prostituted woman does not desire to have sex with a punter that he has to pay her to endure it.

  • FierceMild

    Women are not drugs. We are not stolen cars or unguarded laptops or bottles of illicit bathtub gin.

  • Jani

    You’ve been watching too much porn, mate.

  • Hekate Jayne

    I remember reading the male response to “me, too” and there was a set of males that said that “so what if an actress felt like she had to fuck Weinstein to get a part. She could have walked out, but she chose to trade sex, so CHECKMATE, ladies”.

    And I had no idea how liberal feminists would argue that, because it is literally their stance on prostitution.

    Are we human? Or are we sex slaves available for sexual slavery to males for cash?

    What one of us is, we ALL ARE. This thing where liberal feminists say that we are commodities for sale, but we really aren’t for sale, and rape is bad, but paying a woman so that a male can rape her is good, and prostitution is just like any other work, but we can’t force unemployed women (and only women) to do it because it’s different, but it’s the same……….

    This is patriarchal “logic”. It is backwards and it ignores the factual reality of what prostitution actually is, and who it is for, who it benefits.

    Males say something, and then say the opposite and claim that both are true. (Rape never happens, but she wanted it. Life is precious, healthcare for all is bad. Mothers raising kids is super important, but let’s make it impossible for mothers, etc.) Libfems are doing this with prostitution. They are actually gaslighting themselves in an attempt to keep male approval and they either don’t realize or are actively ignoring that the males that they are pandering to don’t see them as human any more than they do prostitutes.

  • Cassandra

    Prostituted women aren’t prostituted because of their sex drives. What a fucking idiotic thing to say. Prostituted women HATE the men that pay to rape them.

  • Jani

    What is your definition of “sexual liberation”?

    There’s more men making more bucks off women’s bodies in the sex trade, whether it’s pimps, pornographers or strip bar owners. Most women involved in street prostitution in my country do it to feed their drug addiction. They talk of being raped, stabbed, choked, beaten and robbed by their punters. They would all quit and get off heroin and crack cocaine if they could. Many of these women have troubled backgrounds. Many have grown up in the care system and most have been raped and sexually abused in early life. Many have children of their own in the care system. They don’t do it because they “love” fucking.

    With regard to brothels, I’ve already written of the realities of the legal brothels of Germany and the Netherlands in a previous post. The women aren’t in it because the “love” fucking. They’re hardy receiving enough money just to eat from the so-called managers.

  • susannunes

    The incel/MRA/PUA/MGTOW crowd is all about rating women on appearance only. Ever hear of the scale 1-10 used to describe women like pieces of meat? These women haters want only 20-year-old women who look like those they see in porn. They think they are entitled to “hot” women. Every other woman they think has “hit the wall.” Never mind most of these men are nothing to look at themselves, and they are delusional enough to think their looks never “hit the wall” but that men get better looking with age, a laugh if you have ever been to a high school reunion that is past the 20-year reunion.

    • Tobysgirl

      So glad to see someone point this out. There are a few, a very few, nice-looking older men, but there are lots of lovely older women. That’s another male meme I guess, the one where men get better-looking as they age whereas women just fall apart.

  • Gundog

    I’ve always been up front that I don’t buy into your neo Marxist analysis. I agree with almost all of the problems radical feminism points out, but think there is so much more to it than just the amorphous scapegoat “patriarchy.”

    • Hekate Jayne

      Male covers his ears and eyes and says I CANT SEE PATRIARCHY, SO IT ISNT THERE LALALALALALALA.

    • Wren

      You do not agree with radical feminists AT ALL. You defend prostitution as necessary evil because “men have needs.” You have revealed your true self and you are an active participant and defender of that elusive patriarchy whose existence you deny. Funny, I bet your not the first man to pretend it isn’t real.

      You are mistaken if you think my short response means I am inarticulate or easily confused; it means I don’t want to waste any of my precious time on motherfucking pieces of dick-shit like you.

    • Alienigena

      Perhaps the dickarchy? None of the ideological frameworks that you could propose would make any sense. You are not a female person, you have never lived as a female person, you weren’t indoctrinated by your parents into knowing your place and keeping your trap shut. You didn’t have boys threatening you with physical violence just for showing curiousity about a sport and daring to set a foot into ‘their space’. You don’t get it. I had to suffer the company of people I now know as liberal feminists and frankly there is nothing about how they see the world that has any internal logic. Not the logic that radical feminism has. Liberal feminists can’t think coherently and they don’t offer reasonable explanations for historical and current patterns of male violence. They make the same excuses that institutions like the media make for violent men, e.g. he was distraught, he was mentally ill, he lost his job, he felt shame, he felt horny, she lead him on, etc.

  • Hekate Jayne

    Some WOMAN will always HAVE TO choose between prostitution on necessities that only money can buy because males are selfish, greedy and place their boner above half of humanity.

    Are you drunk? Or are you just bored and enjoy looking like a fucking dumbass?

  • acommentator

    “if we didn’t live in a capitalist society no one would be “trading money for sex” ”

    That is, IMO, stretching the meaning of capitalism to the breaking point. There was prostitution in ancient times. I am out of school a long time, and maybe capitalism is not considered a modern thing anymore, but I don’t recall Greece and Rome being considered capitalist societies. There were also prostitutes in medieval times. Again, while the roots of capitalism may be found there, I don’t think medieval society was considered capitalist.

  • Wren

    Ohhhh I’m thinking it’s highly probable that he paid-to-rape a woman or two in his life.

  • acommentator

    “I asked how do you have liberation without some women making a buck off sex?”

    You don’t, IMO. Prostitution would be legal if people were completely free to do whatever they wanted sexually. And the push to legalize it is indeed an effort to eliminate an aspect of sex that is still regulated. I assume that is why so many liberals and leftists support legalization.

    Nonetheless, prostitution remains illegal in most countries because it is harmful. It is a restriction on freedom, but one that is justified, IMO.

    How long that prohibition will last, I don’t know. I would have thought it would be illegal have children for money, and that surrogacy contracts would be unenforceable as against public policy. Public policy has decidedly moved the other way, at least in most states in the U.S.

    I don’t know where it all leads.

  • Niimi

    Thank you for writing this. Deserves wide distribution.

  • therealcie

    You are confusing incels with some lonely ordinary Joe. Incels believe that women owe them sex. They are thoroughly awful people. You can find examples of truly wretched statements Incels have made about women at We Hunted the Mammoth. It never fails to astound me how horrible some men can be.

  • northernTNT

    Every word brilliant.

  • acommentator

    “making it clear that she [Friedman] (whether intentionally or unintentionally) missed the point entirely.”

    I am mystified by what is going on with the commentators on Douthat’s article. I know the article is kind of all over the map. But I have never seen so many people writing on significant media platforms just totally miss where a writer is coming from. Its like they are not reading a different article.

    • Meghan Murphy

      I feel like a bunch of them just read the headline or read a couple tweets about the article and responded without reading it or trying to understand it. It’s kind of nuts, actually. How do all these people have writing careers? And don’t they have editors?

      • acommentator

        Yes, especially about the editors.

        Its not like these people are just writing on the internet. I am no fan of Vice or Feminste or whatever, but they are significant platforms. They should be embarrassed.

        • Meghan Murphy

          Well and Vice has money! They are seemingly one of the only platforms growing and expanding, rather than folding. They should have good editors and better writers.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Glad you liked the piece, will!

  • Adam King

    Yes you have a right to life, but you also have a right to quality of life. That means you have a right to sexual pleasure within the bounds of the law.

    • Meghan Murphy

      Not at someone else’s expense. Pleasure yourself, by all means, but we aren’t sacrificing women for your orgasms.

    • Alienigena

      Uhm, what about quality of life for me then because everyone I meet is very grudging about granting people with serious allergies (e.g. food allergies) or chronic illnesses the right to avoid the things that cause them to become ill (e.g. triggers for asthma like smoke, pollution). No one requires sex to live, they need human contact (non-sexual interaction including conversation, non-sexual touching). By the way this society doesn’t give a shit about the quality of life of people with chronic illnesses, especially if they are women. But apparently it does care that men have sexual access to women. We don’t agree on the definition of quality of life. For me it means being able to work, being able to get to work (walk or walk to and from bus), being able to shop for food (walk from car to grocery store door, walk in store), you know everyday things. Independence. Because sometimes all of those can very difficult when I am at my worst.

    • FierceMild

      No you don’t

    • Melanie

      If you have a right to something then that means you can lobby the government to ensure that you have it. You don’t have the right to lobby the government to provide you with sexual pleasure because that would entail infringing on someone else’s rights. Sexual pleasure is a desire, not a right. It’s also not essential to quality of life. People who are unable or unwilling to have sex for whatever reason can still maintain quality of life.

    • Yisheng Qingwa

      No

  • Hekate Jayne

    Yes, because she was not wrong.

    But instead of fact checking, it sounds wrong to your dude brain, so it must be wrong, and you must set her straight right fucking now because you are so sure of her wrongness and your rightness that you don’t even bother checking.

    You really don’t get it, do you? Your only comment is that she is incorrect, and you are wrong about it. You know how many fucking dudes will read an article about rape or harassment or misogyny and they ignore the content and decide that facts are wrong just because they “feel” like it is wrong.

    Do you go into articles written by dudes and look for facts that you think are wrong and then bring it to their attention? I bet you fucking don’t.

    You fucking told the author that a factual part of her article “sounds like pure speculation”. I was right, bro, you ARE a dick.

  • Eva Jasmena

    I agree with that.

  • Wren

    Donegan is a brave woman and that is a decent article. Ironically, it’s in Cosmo, a magazine that trains young women to fulfill men’s desires, lol.

    • acommentator

      “Ironically, it’s in Cosmo, a magazine that trains young women to fulfill men’s desires, lol.”

      But that makes it another example of what Meghan Murphy discusses above, no? Cosmo cites to Douthat’s article, but in a manner so as to avoid engaging with his actual argument about where currently dominant culture is taking us.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I see *many* attractive women with ugly men around these parts… Never the reverse, though. Weird, eh!

  • Meghan Murphy

    No… ‘Stacys’.. Do you know what a ‘Becky’ is?

  • Meghan Murphy

    The women in porn are sacrificed… But also, porn harms all women, and makes you shitty in bed, meaning it also harms whatever woman you end up with, in real life.

  • susannunes

    Douthat was talking about a dude named Robin Hanson, who has a blog where he proposed this revolting idea of “redistributing” sex, as if sex is a commodity. Hanson is an economics instructor from George Mason University. If you read “Democracy in Chains,” you will know that George Mason University is the hotbed institution for “libertariarianism.” Crackpot economist James Buchanan, who basically invented “libertarianism,” taught there, and the institution is heavily bankrolled by Charles Koch. This is all you need to know. Hanson should be fired from his job. No way should anybody teach who basically proposes men have a “right” to rape women.

  • acommentator

    It does not involve sexual desire on their part, but it certainly involves sex.

  • Boom

    Bravo. Bravo. Well said, as usual. Two thumbs up for Feminist Current.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I wouldn’t want someone to do something for me if it hurt, traumatized, and dehumanized them…

  • Meghan Murphy

    No one provides you with free speech, though. You just have the right to speak your opinions. It doesn’t depend on anyone doing anything or on you penetrating another person’s body… This, plus the internet example, are very bad analogies… You seem not to understand how sex works.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I mean, yeah, a ‘basic’ white woman. A “Stacy” is a very attractive woman. Like, whatever the movie cliche of a sorority girl or cheerleader is. ‘Becky’ doesn’t really have anything to do with attractiveness…

  • Minerva Conatus

    Broadband internet is not another human being. Broadband internet does not, itself, have rights.

  • Minerva Conatus

    And how would that work, exactly?

  • Minerva Conatus

    Stop spreading the lie that prostituted women have high sex drives and just love sex with anyone and everyone. I enjoy eating–that doesn’t mean that I would enjoy having moldy bread forced down my throat twenty times a day.

  • Anthocerotopsida

    I don’t respect entiteled, sexually aggressive men or their sex drives. What are you gonna do about it?

    It’s not my job to accommodate men who pretend that they have super-human sex drives that cannot be controlled and that I, a mere animated sex doll, could never understand. It’s everyone’s responsibility to fucking control themselves. We can all control ourselves. Sex isn’t important.

  • Anthocerotopsida

    When can one be said to “need” a prostitute? What happens if such a person doesn’t get a prostitute in their time of need?

  • Meghan Murphy

    In Canada wireless is pretty expensive… Must be different in the US.

  • Meghan Murphy

    That’s not what I meant, obviously. I mean your free speech doesn’t depend on another person’s body. Like, you don’t get to stand on someone’s chest while you share your opinions.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Agree. Women staying with abusive men harms children no matter what. Even if the men *don’t* hit or otherwise abuse the kids, they see their father abusing their mother, and that is harmful, and perpetuates the cycle.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Thanks Tessa!

  • Meghan Murphy

    Thanks Sashimi73!

  • Meghan Murphy

    I bet, for all this talk of the government taking care of his sexual desires, that this guy is a libertarian, too.

    • elle-laments

      Maybe he just identifies as a libertarian…

  • acommentator

    Yes, when I first read it, I thought she was kind of avoiding what he was saying rather than misunderstanding it. I went back after your comment and read it again, and I agree, she just misread him.

  • acommentator

    I understand that rape is about power, and hatred of women. But it is expressed sexually. I just think that is a factual statement. Rape victims sometimes get pregnant. Clearly, that involves sex.

  • deci

    Men buy sex because they are either lonely or horny or both. Incels believe they are entitled to sex for free.

    • Eva Jasmena

      From my observations, most men and women (and yes, a few women did try to solicit my services initially until the ad was revised to explicitly exclude them) buy sex to feed a compulsive urge. The behaviour seemed pathological to me. Some of the men told me flat out that they felt ashamed or didn’t like doing it, and they were the more respectful ones relatively speaking. Those who felt no shame were the misogynistically sadistic ones. So as far as I could tell, we could really divide buyers into two categories: compulsive buyers and misogynistic ones. That leads me to only one conclusion: criminalizing the buying of sex benefits everyone involved.

  • Meghan Murphy

    If you truly cared about ‘mandatory quality of life’, you wouldn’t support prostitution, because no woman wants to fuck strange men day in and day out.

  • Meghan Murphy

    YESSS! Thank you. Men pretend they don’t care about marriage and pretend as though it’s women forcing them into it, kicking and screaming. Similarly, they think they don’t need to think about the choice to have children or plan for it at all, because some woman will just do it for them, and kids will just fall into their laps, somehow.

    My last boyfriend would have moved in with me, gotten married, and had kids in a second if I’d wanted to, but I didn’t, so we didn’t. I’ve had to fight every boyfriend I’ve ever had to convince them I didn’t want kids. Apparently they’d never encountered a woman who actively decided she didn’t want to get married and give birth/raise children.

    I mentioned this in another comment somewhere else, but the guy I’m currently seeing recently told me he didn’t believe me when I first told him I didn’t want kids!!!

    I also wish more women would actively push back against this stuff. I genuinely love the idea of having a wedding, because I love parties and because there’s literally no other way to force all your family and friends to come to one place and party with you, except weddings, but I fail to understand why we all still feel like we have to get legally married in order to have a legit relationship. There’s no point.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I mean, I’m going off what they’re saying…

  • Wren

    Clearly, that is an impossible concept for him to grasp.

    • FierceMild

      The fact that this is so *ahem* hard for them to grasp is the best evidence we have that feminism is in its infancy.

  • Meghan Murphy

    I loooove weddings ha. But really just because I get to see all my friends at once. I wouldn’t love, say, a stranger’s wedding… Or a super religious wedding, I’m sure. But yes, I agree that if you want to be together, you will choose to be together. I’m not sure why people think marriage provides any kind of security against this, anyway. Men cheat all the time, married or not. Divorces happen all the time.

    Re: dudes. Yeah, most of them plain don’t seem to get it. Even the smart nice ones. They don’t think about kids that much because it’s never occurred to them that they should have to. I think most of them think they just kinda happen eventually. It’s maddening.

    • Anthocerotopsida

      For sure. I’ve been to a couple really good weddings. But I wouldn’t enjoy my own. And even a good wedding is bittersweet because I kind of feel like the bride is ruining her life lol.

      It’s wild how different men’s perspective is. It’s not their health on the line, so they don’t think much about pregnancy. I’d like to think that if the roles were reversed, that I would care enough about my partner’s health than to take unnecessary steps and risk pregnancy.

      • Meghan Murphy

        Oh lord true. I messy cried through my sister’s entire wedding and not of of joy, now that you mention it. That was not a particularly fun wedding, actually. Most of my friends’ weddings have been pretty fun and funny (i.e. the speeches, etc., lots of good old friends and drinking and dancing)

  • FierceMild

    People don’t apologize to dickfood.

    • Hekate Jayne

      This is why I almost never include links in anything, anymore.

      If a woman questions me, she might ask a question, or more likely, she will just use Google herself.

      Males routinely just ignore facts. Or they don’t read the source that I link to. Or the source is wrong. Or I am lying.

      I mean, males are a class that can’t figure out how to make a sandwich. Or what rape is.

      Males can’t logic, they base everything on their feels. Charts and statistics are upsetting because they can’t figure them out, and when we explain them, the facts upset them, so they ignore it.

      So when males FEEL like it is speculation, he doesn’t have to fact check it. Because his feeling trumps the fact. As we can see from this dudebro’ s reaction to what an incel actually is.

  • FierceMild

    Bloodymarybloodymary…

  • FierceMild

    Yup. I used to think I was something remarkable for having many offers of marriage. Now I understand what was being offered.

  • FierceMild

    Yeah. My husband and I didn’t want children. Until we decided to have one at which point we talked it over. No “mistakes” ever. There is no excuse.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Reason women are ‘selling’ in the first place is because they have no other choice.

  • Melanie

    What is ‘mandatory quality of life’? You’re in for a rude awakening if you think you can be guaranteed everything that you want in life. Sometimes when things don’t go your way you just have to be an adult and suck it up.

  • Anthocerotopsida

    “males want to become one of your responsibilities” Ha ain’t it the truth. And I admire your dedication to avoiding pregnancy. Definitely something to consider.

  • FierceMild

    So you’re fine with forcing women to have sex with you because it might improve your quality of life, but draw the line at having sex with a man who wants to have sex with you.

    If you aren’t already a rapist you are in danger of becoming one.

    • Adam King

      Actually my genetics make that an impossibility. It’s not a matter of choice.

  • FierceMild

    And now there is a practice among young dudebros of putting on a condom at the start of sex and taking it off later when she can’t see. This is done expressly to violate her and increase the chances of pregnancy. It’s called “stealthing”.

    • Hekate Jayne

      More male doubletalk.

      These same manchildren will cry about “women trapping” them with pregnancy, lol.

  • Melanie

    Ha! These men are so melodramatic.

  • Yisheng Qingwa

    You should take it up the ass for money. Then everybody wins.

  • M. Zoidberg

    >>”The way I understood it, sellers can and do refuse to sell something to a buyer even if the buyer can afford the item being sold.”

    Prostitution Narratives: Stories of Survival in the Sex Trade

    From what I gathered reading the book above, even in places like New Zealand and Australia (where prostitution is legal and “workers” allegedly have “rights”) prostituted women aren’t really allowed to say “no,” unless they want to be fired/blacklisted from the legal brothels.

  • Minerva Conatus

    What if the government compelled you to?

  • Meghan Murphy

    None of these mass shooters or incel-like killers were obese tho

  • Bleeps3

    You are the exact reason I try to carry
    an extra 40+ lbs. A quality partner to you would be a bunch of parts made of Play-Doh. But you’re too f-d up to just stick with that.

  • FierceMild

    “Why should a man or woman not demand a partner of the highest quality?” What does this mean, precisely?

    • Hekate Jayne

      He wants to be with a dude that is ignoring him. And he is convinced that if he can make himself “desirable” enough, that the male that he wants will sweep him off his feet.

      But he needs male government to force him to become “desirable” because he can’t figure it out on his own.

      “Desireable” is so fucking arbitrary. I suppose we must all be thin and blond? No more different heights or hair colors or lengths. We must all look exactly the same! And I suppose any woman over the age of 24 is executed. Because old is not desirable.

      But that won’t help gay dudes like Alex, though. I think he took the wrong pills.

    • Liz

      He is trying to neutralize the conversation.

  • Meghan Murphy

    Again, that’s what a ‘Stacy’ is. An attractive woman.

    • mail_turtle

      Okay, I thought I was missing something when trying to understand your point of view, but it’s clear now.

  • some woman

    You don’t have a fucking RIGHT to another person, you motherfucking creep.

    Get out of this place. You’re poison.

  • some woman

    “agreed-upon”

    LMAO

  • some woman

    Dude ffs listen to yourself. If sex is a right, it automatically implies *someone* is obliged to provide it. It literally makes rape legal. Not sure whether you’re hopelessly stupid or you think we are.

  • some woman

    Good job comparing women to broadband internet, you contemptible misogynist.