Because he annoyed me...

Some bloke wrote an article on First Post defending 'women's right' to partake in raunch culture... And so I 'had my say'. It went something along the lines of:

I would like to address a couple points made by the author (who I noticed was male).

"The normalisation of sex is an issue in our society and does cause problems."
It is not so much a normalisation of sex, but a porno-isation of sex. For raunch culture is not about emulating sex, but about emulating pornography. Pornography is the simulation of sex and pleasure, it is not real pleasure which is being conveyed. If people are truly liberated about sex, they wouldn't be emulating ACTING. I believe this to be restrictive, limiting and not liberated or empowered.

I personally found Tom Eilenberg's argument weak: his distress at having 'to endure the upsetting spectacle of eight-year-old girls prancing around singing "I'll be your naughty girl tonight"' weakens his argument that raunch culture should be enjoyed by female students because it is their "right", because it is as a direct result of raunch culture that eight-year-old girls are singing sexually provocative songs. Clearly, raunch culture affects more than just university students, and Eilenberg seems to be acknowledging that raunch culture has a negative affect on young girls.

Secondly, I feel compelled to argue with his belief that "There are more important battles for the feminists of today to be fighting." I do not believe he has any right to tell feminists what they should or should not believe in, or fight for. I find it - and to quote him - "condescending and plain wrong". It is patronising, too, and seems to invalidate many feminists' views.

I would suggest that Tom Eilenberg should read Female Chauvinist Pigs - Women & The Rise of Raunch Culture by Ariel Levy before he comments on raunch culture again.