JANET BLOOMFIELD: Seduction versus coercion: accountability is such a b*tch. The post concerns how feminists misconstrue masculinity and deny agency to women. With regard to the former she writes,

It’s not masculinity that insists men are little more than rutting pigs seeking any wet hole. That’s the story feminism spins about masculinity, particularly through the idea of rape culture . . .

How do men define masculinity then . . . ?




Top three qualities reported by 27 000 randomly selected men from 8 different countries.

With regard to feminists’ strategic denial of agency to women, she writes,

Both the man and the woman are at a party, both are approached by opposite sex partners, both receive passionate kisses and both are fondled. Both agree to sexual activity even though neither one is interested in that.

The man wakes up and thinks “Well that was stupid. I’m not doing that again.”

The woman wakes up and thinks, “Oh my god, I’ve been raped!” . . .

There you have the main difference between men and women who have experienced sexual coercion. He gives in but never fails to understand he made the choice to give in. She gives in and wants to punish her male partner for her decision, because she can’t handle the responsibility for her own choices.

It’s really pathetic.

When feminists peddle their “rape culture” and “toxic masculinity” they are really attempting to reframe our whole culture so that men are responsible actors accountable for their own choices, while women are helpless victims who cannot be held responsible for theirs, but can instead pass that responsibility onto men. And it’s patriarchy that infantilizes women, is it?

Sounds like a case of reverse reverse sexism, a subset of reverse reverse bigotry, whereby an ideology of victimization ends up harming the very groups it intends to privilege.