> sex is treated as something that women give to men, sometimes in exchange for money/influence/drugs/etc.
Sure, but if that's why, then surely sexual restraint means that women will more often use other mechanisms to get ahead. I don't get the impression that sexual restraint is what leads some women to prostitute themselves in the way you describe.
> in a truly equal world, with a healthy attitude to sex, female sexual desire would be recognised too, and sex would stop being something that women give to men, and instead be something that two people (of whatever genders) enjoy together.
What exactly makes that attitude healthy (or rather, healthier than a more restrained attitude)? I sincerely doubt there is some yet-undiscovered natural state in which men and women enjoy sex in the same way; it seems to me that women have a greater degree of control, and generally less desire, when it comes to sex.
The reason sex is "treated as something that women give to men" is that they are fundamentally in control. Ask yourself why you see Amy Schumer openly talk about how she knowingly raped an incapacitated man who she knew could not consent, and it seems to be interpreted as a comedy piece. There is a fundamental mechanical difference in how sex and sexual relationships work between the sexes, and no amount of libertinism has changed that.
I'm generally very confused about what you're trying to say. I asked why lenticular said that a lack of overt sexual imagery in media was denying women opportunities; I find this utterly confusing as a line of reasoning, and nothing I've read here supports it.
I get the impression that some here will ascribe every possible positive attribute to libertinism, and every possible negative attribute to restraint; but when it comes to backing up any specific assertion, no supporting argument is provided.
Sure, but if that's why, then surely sexual restraint means that women will more often use other mechanisms to get ahead. I don't get the impression that sexual restraint is what leads some women to prostitute themselves in the way you describe.
> in a truly equal world, with a healthy attitude to sex, female sexual desire would be recognised too, and sex would stop being something that women give to men, and instead be something that two people (of whatever genders) enjoy together.
What exactly makes that attitude healthy (or rather, healthier than a more restrained attitude)? I sincerely doubt there is some yet-undiscovered natural state in which men and women enjoy sex in the same way; it seems to me that women have a greater degree of control, and generally less desire, when it comes to sex.
The reason sex is "treated as something that women give to men" is that they are fundamentally in control. Ask yourself why you see Amy Schumer openly talk about how she knowingly raped an incapacitated man who she knew could not consent, and it seems to be interpreted as a comedy piece. There is a fundamental mechanical difference in how sex and sexual relationships work between the sexes, and no amount of libertinism has changed that.
I'm generally very confused about what you're trying to say. I asked why lenticular said that a lack of overt sexual imagery in media was denying women opportunities; I find this utterly confusing as a line of reasoning, and nothing I've read here supports it.
I get the impression that some here will ascribe every possible positive attribute to libertinism, and every possible negative attribute to restraint; but when it comes to backing up any specific assertion, no supporting argument is provided.