"For most of history, we’ve taken for granted the implicit brutality of male sexuality." - Hallo friend USA IN NEWS, In the article you read this time with the title "For most of history, we’ve taken for granted the implicit brutality of male sexuality.", we have prepared well for this article you read and download the information therein. hopefully fill posts Article HOT, Article NEWS, we write this you can understand. Well, happy reading.

Title : "For most of history, we’ve taken for granted the implicit brutality of male sexuality."
link : "For most of history, we’ve taken for granted the implicit brutality of male sexuality."

"For most of history, we’ve taken for granted the implicit brutality of male sexuality."

"In 1976, the radical feminist and pornography opponent Andrea Dworkin said that the only sex between a man and a woman that could be undertaken without violence was sex with a flaccid penis: “I think that men will have to give up their precious erections,” she wrote. In the third century A.D., it is widely believed, the great Catholic theologian Origen, working on roughly the same principle, castrated himself."

From "The Unexamined Brutality of the Male Libido" by Stephen Marche (in the NYT). Marche gets a little too personal:

Professionally, too, I have seen just how profoundly men don’t want to talk about their own gendered nature. In the spring, I published a male take on the fluctuations of gender and power in advanced economies; I was interviewed over 70 times by reporters from all over the world, but only three of them were men.

People not being interested in your book is not "profound." Especially if you promoted it with the phrase "fluctuations of gender and power in advanced economies."

Acknowledging the brutality of male libido is not, of course, some kind of excuse. Sigmund Freud recognized the id, and knew it as “a chaos, a caldron full of seething excitations.”... Freud also understood that repression, any repression, is inherently fluid and complicated and requires humility and self-searching to navigate....

We're taking Freud seriously again?! This makes me want to go back and reread what Andrea Dworkin wrote about Freud. Just a snippet*:

Inescapably, a woman’s body incarnates shame, her genitals especially signifying dirt and death: whether referred to in a Playboy party joke as “gash” or expounded on by Freud:

Probably no male human being is spared the fright of castration at the sight of a female genital. Why some people become homosexual as a consequence of that impression, while others fend it off by creating a fetish, and the great majority surmount it, we are frankly not able to explain.

Just seeing those genitals turns a man gay or makes him rub up against rubber for a lifetime; to “surmount it,” this great fear caused by these monstrous female genitals, means to mount her successfully, unintimidated by the wound, her castration, the blood, the slime, the filth. “Oh yes,” wrote Freud to Jung, “I forgot to say that menstrual blood must be counted as excrement.”

Dworkin, Andrea. "Intercourse" (pp. 231-232). Basic Books. Kindle Edition.
___________________

* Freudian innuendo intended.

Thus articles "For most of history, we’ve taken for granted the implicit brutality of male sexuality."

that is all articles "For most of history, we’ve taken for granted the implicit brutality of male sexuality." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.

You now read the article "For most of history, we’ve taken for granted the implicit brutality of male sexuality." with the link address https://usainnew.blogspot.com/2017/11/for-most-of-history-weve-taken-for.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: