I will not continue after this post, to not take the thread off-topic more than I have.
Sorry for the wall of text.
>>97646725>Why can't I find someone else to fuck nonstop who also wants to be my best friend?Evolutionary biology.
>>97646831I didn't say *all." That's the point of the modifier. There are a sizeable amount of sex-negative feminists, they fall into 2 camps based on when they started positing philosophy: 2nd-wave feminists (what created "political lesbianism") and a non-zero of modern radfems (SWERFs, for example).
The facts do back me up here, anti-sex feminists *exist* and had a large say in the modern feminist politic (how many prominent feminists are radfems? How many subscribe to theories from people like Julie Blindel?) and saying they don't exist is nonsense at best and intentional cover on their behalf at worst.
GG opened the door for sex-negative feminists to start busybodying over video games, see FemFreq a few years back. Before you say "just one person," she spoke at the UN and has worked with many parts of the industry. She has institutional power far more than I do, and she is most definitely a sex-negative (at least for men) feminist.>>97647045You don't capitalize your sentences, so you make me think you both do not care about what you actually say (because you do not care to use proper grammar) and are a phoneposter. Despite this, I will reply in good faith.
>still seen as asexual beings by many>female orgasm is still questioned>sex drive is seen as a moral failingThese are all biases on your part of perspective, where you simply think because you don't see something it doesn't exist. You wouldn't see men or boys getting shamed for their sexuality, because you aren't one and wouldn't have been shamed for it. All of these even seem to be from a very particular puritan perspective that is not all-encompassing to society, which again, is a bias on your part.
>saying the internet was overwhelmingly male tells me you have a skewed biasWe literally have data on internet usage rates. It's not "bias" to cite statistical data available to everyone with a google search.
The ratio of men to women on the internet in 1995 was 3-to-1, according to the 2000 research paper "Health e-People: The Online Consumer Experience" by Cain, Sarasohn-Kahn and Wayne (all women btw), which itself cites research by Forrester Research from 1999 and Jupiter Communications from 2000.
