Someone I follow posted a quote from a blog that talked about how "sex" is only taught as PIV and doesn't teach how to properly please women, so I clicked the blog link.
It turned into a "all PIV sex is socially conditioned rape" diatribe. Some radical feminists outright state that all heterosexual intercourse is rape. Some radical feminists disagree and say that statement lacks nuance. A lot of heterosexual feminists say they feel personally insulted by the statement “all intercourse is rape” because they have had personal experience of PIV they wanted and PIV they didn’t want and have processed those experiences as different from each other. I understand that. It makes me uncomfortable too. The whole subject of PIV makes me uncomfortable. I endured it for more than ten years of my life until I discovered radical feminism, read FCM’s Intercourse Series, had my mind blown and quit it. I feel like it’s impossible to get a sense of clarity about PIV and what it does to your psyche until you stop doing it and this is because of the trauma bonding that FCM talks about. Women who are still engaging in heterosexual relationships feel particularly uncomfortable with the suggestion that all intercourse is rape because it means acknowledging firstly that the man you share your bed with is a rapist and secondly, that you possess virtually no social power or bodily autonomy. These are hard things to face.
Another thing that’s hard for women to accept is that we do not own our sexualities. There is not a woman alive today who has an authentic sexuality of her own. All women have been groomed to be penis receptacles in a cultural narrative of man-meets-woman-man-puts-penis-in-woman’s-vagina. We are told we like putting things in our vaginas, especially penises, and that’s about the end of it.
. . .
Women are acquiescing consenting to all this shit because they literally do not know any different. Until I discovered radical feminism, it hadn’t even occurred to me that I could refuse.
. . .
PIV can be justified as ‘always rape’ because it always involves the weaponization of the penis against a woman on a girl. The woman may ‘enjoy’ the sensation of having a penis inside her but she wouldn’t be the first woman in the world to eroticize her own subordination as a means of coping with it. Men know that every single time they stick their dicks in a woman, they’re putting her at risk of pregnancy. They know that pregnancy can kill women. They know that if they cause a pregnancy to occur they can walk away at any time with no major social consequences. They know what kind of harm’s way they’re putting us in but they really like ejaculating inside us so they do it anyway.
The thing with PIV is that, much like BDSM, it doesn’t really matter how much you like it and how free you think your choice is when you make it; the activity in itself is inherently harmful. It’s a form of assault. Whether or not you acquiesce to the assault or ‘want’ the assault doesn’t change the nature of the assault.
. . .
It isn’t possible to categorically state that all heterosexual intercourse is not rape when what men do to express “love” for women (sex/PIV) is the same as what they do to express contempt for women (rape/PIV).
In the comments, this moron refuses to clarify on her position of lesbian penetrative sex, by repeatedly saying "this is an article is about heterosexual sex, and if I wanted to write about lesbians, I'd write about lesbians."
