Porn For Women revisited

[gonzo]

Amanda Marcotte of Pandagon, in a nice two-for-one, takes down the "no-sex" class notion that women can be sexually attractive but never sexually *attracted* and the even stupider idea that heterosexual feminists aren't interested in men at all.

[Columnist Joel] Stein accepts the premise that only women can be sexually attractive.

Neither gender wants men to try to be sexy. Slut Day will embrace that fact by having all men dress like Hef: silk pajamas or bathrobes only. No, those aren’t sexy either, but women feel uncomfortable if they’re wearing a fishnet bodysuit and their date is wearing chinos and a blue Oxford. Or a bow tie and a bookstore bag.

The notion that even straight women find the male body not sexually attractive has always puzzled me; how do men who hold this opinion reconcile that with the knowledge that straight women want to have sex with men? I suppose the cover story is that we women live in a higher moral plane, and that we fall for men’s sparkling wits while they think of baser things, and that we only sully ourselves with the physical aspects of sex in order to enjoy the spiritual benefits. It is, like many patriarchal stories, complete bullshit, but whatever.

source