I had the fortune of finding an article posted about 4 weeks ago on “We Hunted The Mammoth” in which the sites owner and noted male feminist – David Futrelle – promoted an article on The New Statesmen about how liberating men sexually would bring about an end to the problems women face concerning sexism.
Liberation usually sounds like a phenomenal idea. Well, what kind of liberation is the the author – a dominatrix by trade named Margaret Corvid – talking about?
Let’s get started. There are plenty of anticipated attacks on MRA’s, the manosphere, and the ever present Patriarchy. Before we go any further, she makes a very important point about feminism and how it relates to men.
“As feminists, we rightfully put the interests of women first, and we are skeptical of ostensibly feminist arguments that appeal to men’s interests.”
Straight from the horses mouth. It’s statements like this that should convince anyone with a pair of testicles that any men’s issues the feminist movement claims to advocate for are at most lip service. When it comes to the lip service, she barely even does that with her suggested feminist skepticism of anything that appeals to “men’s interests.”
The sexual liberation she talks about later will specifically not appeal to the interest of most men in the general population. Throughout this piece she implies, but never explicit states this idea that men should be vulnerable during sex. However, the kind of vulnerability she refers to is that of men being dominated or “penetrated”.
“He is allowed to penetrate, but not to be penetrated; to control, but not to surrender; to enjoy the grace, sensuality, and sex appeal of a woman, but never to wish to express these traits himself.”
Okay, fine. What disturbs me is that she continually suggests that men who don’t enjoy or being dominated are somehow suppressing their full sexuality. Perhaps its not fear preventing an embrace of this kind of sexuality, but rather a majority of men who really don’t want anything put up their ass.
Even now, what feminism asks of men – that they be conscious of their privilege and respect the agency of women – can lead them to truly satisfying intimate relationships.
Notice how she mentions that being aware of privilege and “respecting the agency of women” whatever that actually means and/or exactly how one goes about that somehow equates to satisfying intimate relationships.
Think about that. Since when has checking, being aware, and acknowledging, one’s privilege automatically translated to successful intimacy in relationships? Acknowledging your male privilege isn’t going to get your wife or girl-friend to put out more. It’s not going to land you any dates.
In fact, I would suggest that “privileged” checking in front of women for well intentioned reasons of modern SJWs communicate a lack of confidence and assertiveness. It is the equivalent of undermining yourself – which essentially destroys your chances of landing that date.
Later she makes a similar claim in the ending to this piece:
“For men, a true feminism offers liberation and sexual fulfillment, through the very process of coming to a fuller understanding of their privileges, and burdens, under patriarchy. “
Quite an assumption. Again, how? Having a full and thorough understanding of your burdens doesn’t translate to liberation and/or sexual fulfillment.
“We may not be able to reach the most hateful misogynists, but feminists must directly attack the false ideology of men’s rights. We must offer a real answer for men consumed by anxiety, and especially those who feel a sense of sexual frustration.“
Yet again, I don’t think the answer to sexual frustration for many men is being dominated and/or having things shoved up their ass. Being dominated by a dominatrix might appeal to a small segment of the male population, but what about the rest of us?
“It is feminism that offers men the chance at a sexually fulfilling life. When rape culture is extinguished, when patriarchy subsides, all genders can realize their full sexual expression in safety.”
Checking our privilege and patriarchal burdens doesn’t seem to give us a clear picture and game-plan for improving our sex lives if it doesn’t involve anal penetration by a foreign object. Being forced to rain in our “toxic masculinity” in concern to our sexuality as feminism demands also doesn’t seem to sound like a fulfilling proposition.
I’ll make a brave and shocking assertion; a fulfilling sex life for men can’t be achieved by concentrating specifically on the issues of women and ignoring those of men which today’s radical feminists seem to do quite often.