PIV SEX/INTERCOURSE IS BAD FOR WOMEN

submitted by [deleted] from self.GenderCritical

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 12 insightful - 2 fun12 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

That "PIV is always rape, ok?" article is, quite honestly, garbage.

"Sex for men is the unilateral penetration of their penis into a woman (or anything else replacing and symbolising the female orifice)..." um... gay men would disagree. I would disagree. I will peg a man, an experience that I find truly empowering, and that, to both of us, is sex.

"PIV is a man mounting on a woman to thrust a large member of himself into her most intimate parts", clearly someone has never thought of the woman mounting the man and being in control of the situation. (I actually hurt a few penises doing this too roughly-- oops)

"The fact intercourse causes so many infections and tears and warts attests to the unnaturalness of intercourse, that it’s not meant to be. The vagina’s primary function isn’t to be penetrated by a penis but to eject a baby for birth." Uhhh... what? This is garbage. Using argument, guys doing anal to each other would be considered "unnatural" as all I would have to do is cite the aids epidemic. I could then expand to ALL sex is unnatural because you can get many infections, tears, warts etc as there is no such thing as "safe sex".

[–]emissch 9 insightful - 4 fun9 insightful - 3 fun10 insightful - 4 fun -  (2 children)

It honestly sounds like it was written by an infant who just learned what sex is, haha.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Some of the comments by the author are not better...

"The reason we have a vagina is because if we are pregnant, the baby can come out. It’s the physical function of the vagina. There is no other way for the baby to come out than through the vagina..." Apparently has never heard of a c-section, which has been around for centuries.

"...free-chosen PIV will never happen, since it’s rape." Just wow. Guess all of those times I initiated PIV sex because I WANTED IT, not only was a raped but I was asking to be raped.

"If you take the example of underage girls, whether she “sought” the PIV or not doesn’t change the fact it counts legally as rape, because it is understood that the girl has been manipulated and groomed and she is not acting under her own volition, she is doing that because of fear of retaliation or consequences if she doesn’t comply or please him. If you can understand that, why can’t you understand that the dynamics are EXACTLY the same for adult women? Why would the constraints on PIV, once women turn 18, suddenly disappear, and women are suddenly free and full of agency to want PIV of their own volition? This makes no sense whatsoever." So like, if I, as an adult, go to some man who I don't know and proposition sex, because I want to have PIV sex. And had I not taken the initiative interacting with this individual, I otherwise would go on my life never interacting with them. That is ME being afraid of retaliation or consequences of me not complying or pleasing him? Oh, come on!

"I’m sorry but I don’t believe you [another commenter] weren’t traumatised by PIV." I'm pretty sure that is gaslighting.

[–]emissch 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm not sure if the author considers herself a radfem but I do think these mental gymnastics are problematic and anti-feminist. I'm not a liberal feminist by any means and do think "choice" feminism has issues, but when you gaslight, deny agency and sexual desire to your fellow woman, you're not that much different from an authoritarian conservative trying to control women's bodies and sexuality.