lots of soldiers enjoy getting their kit off I await the youtube video of Harry dancing to Sexy and I know It with his fellow combatants.

indeed, and one I oppose at every opportunity. Thanks for giving me some more grist for my mill.

I am going now have a good day

thanks for the advice but I am not going to google something I have little interest in.

My point was not how his comments got publicity, but how feminists use certain points of view to their own advantage.

and I havent shaved my legs for years even though I'm not a feminist anymore. Complex creatures women, eh?

with a dildo, any kind of instrument, a bottle, a fist. same way a man might rape a man, minus the use of a penis.

I think feminists and their pals pick up on outrageous statements by the likes of Akin and Goldberg in order to nonconsensually ram their misandry down our throats. I am choking on it.

By emphasising how these awful people think that some rapes are not 'real' or 'authentic' feminism reinforces the idea that ALL RAPES/SEXUAL ASSAULTS are equally horrific and damaging to 'victims' who become a lumpen mass of poor, mute, defenceless women.

Give me a break.

The women in the assange case may indeed be traumatised by the experience of having dated Saint Julian, but from all the accounts of the events and subsequent events, their experiences sound LESS BAD than others I have heard about.

I would rather be 'inserted' in my sleep by someone I don't even care for very much than repeatedly beaten and forced to have sex by a husband of many years and father of my children for example, who I am terrified of.

But by saying this I am called a 'rape apologist' by feminists and lumped together with Akin and Polanski for that matter, as someone who tries to undermine the seriousness of all sexual assaults (on women). For let's not forget. Men get raped too. But in the UK a woman cannot 'rape' a man according to criminal law. A penis is required for that.

so here we are, using a couple of pricks to demonise all penises.

QRG

I see your point - I am reading it now. But I think she is right about the anti-sex feminists and the Religious right. The bit about Julie Bindel working for that Republican anti-sex work Fund in America is not made up. The thing that annoys me is Magnanti makes out she is the first person to challenge those kind of alliances. People like Susie Bright have been doing so for years!

Oh right well I respect people who advocate for sex workers.

One of my problems with BG is the same as my problem with BM. As soon as I questioned some of her research she blocked me on twitter. It's not very...scientific.

I don't think that is how it works. But this is an ongoing often tiring, often circular debate.

I think 'the interesting stuff' cannot wait and must be dealt with now.

no it looks at men who are *assumed* to be gay. The research is always biased towards a binary model of gender/sexuality.

and there are plenty of qualitative studies now, that acknowledge bisexuality e.g.
The Bisexuality Report:
http://www.bisexualindex.org.uk/index.php/TheBise...

and the work of Mark Simpson www.marksimpson.com

Good review. I'm a bit chagrined as I couldn't get a review copy and have only just got my copy so I will be a bit late to this myth busting party.

But 2 things:

1) Northwestern Uni is where Michael J Bailey works. Mark Simpson and I have criticised his 'sex research' as it uses things like penile plesmographs, and originally found bisexuality to not exist (except in people's imaginations). So I am wary of any quotes about sex research from that establishment.

2) Why is Belinda Brooks Gordon a 'hero' of yours? I find her banal at best and very ignorant on some issues, such as, funnily enough, bisexuality. The research she is currently supervising called The Big Gay Study erases bisexual and queer people quite blatantly.