"'Men and misogyny are two separate things'"

How very gracious of you to say so.

So far as I could make out through the author's nagging, she seems to be saying that men's predilection for looking at pictures of sex is because of violence, objectification, oppression, patriarchy, sexism, and "powerraceclassgendersexism". She makes no attempt to prove this. Rather than writing an article that assumes your entire argument is true without any kind of proof but impassioned appeal to absent authority, perhaps you should consider trying to prove your point?

Violence is already illegal. The women in porn don't have a gun at their heads; they're participating because they agree to do so, just like the providers of any other paid service. I would prefer to be paid without performing any work for it: does that mean I'm a "victim" of "violence"?

Oppression: you're going to have to do better than just allege it. Merely unequal outcomes as between men and women doesn't automatically prove your point, because men and women aren't equal in the first place, on account of women have babies and men don't. Just because men don't necessarily agree to pay for the babies that women have, doesn't mean women are being "oppressed". Women's frustrated desire to force others to pay for their babies is not "innate": it's just a social construct of patriarchy that you need to get over.

One complaint that keeps coming up repeatedly is "objectification". But what's that supposed to mean? How could a man be sexually attracted to a woman and *not* objectify her? He'd think that she were himself, is that it?

As for "patriarchy", when you are arguing that men should not be forced to pay for women's babies you will be qualified to make that argument, and not before. Go ahead.

As for "powerraceclassgendersexism", what's that supposed to mean? Without making out your argument, we can hardly be blamed for ridiculing your incoherent hysteria.

Besides, what are we supposed to do? Lock up people who make or look at pictures of consensual sex?

A pathetic piece of harridan-screech.

Peter Hume,

I agree.

For many years feminist were able to get away with the system of “I represent women, so if you don’t agree with me, then you are anti-female and a misogynist”

No one elected them to represent women.

As well, feminists have gone on to carry out some of the worst, most biased and bigoted research ever undertaken in universities, or they have formed their beliefs on no research at all, but hearsay only.

I have also noticed their literature entering more into mainstream media, and their beliefs are becoming accepted as truth, when in fact those beliefs are based on the most minimal evidence, or no evidence at all.

I point the finger directly at the university system for letting them in in the first place, and then allowing them to stay there, when women’s studies (another name for feminist indoctrination) has no relationship in anyway with the scientific method.

Looks like Killarney and Ms Murphy have thrown in the towel.

meaghan - what a great article! every good wish, jas

Jocelynne, what a fatuous comment. Every best wish, ant.