Kiwee wrote:Mainly, don't beat yourself up and make a bigger deal than it is.
Was that a pun? I thought it was funny
KC wrote:Oh my gosh! I'm a card-carrying member of the "wimmin's movement" and I donate money to the anti "anything that moves" brigade (it's tax deductible, you know). I never got the memo about this change in policy on erections. Well, I'll call the home office this afternoon and get back on the mailing list. In the meantime, yes, erections are a bad thing. Well, I kinda used to like them but I can't disappoint the "wimmin's movement." And this does clear up the mystery of how I got pregnant. Thanks for that.
It's okay to disagree but you don't have to twist what he says on purpose. To put what he says more clearly, he was complaining about the subset of feminists who believe that man are inherently aggressors and would see a man with an erection in a social context as a threat.
There are many, many branches of feminism and most of them have mutually exclusive ideas. I don't think that someone classifying herself as a feminist gives me any indication of what that person believes.