"rape and PIV* are almost the same thing", Part II. Welcome to Bizarro World.

[ElboRuum]

9. Not to dodge the question...

...but another thing they don't seem to be able of answering is the very question you ask of me, thereby inspiring speculation.

And that has always been the one pertinent question with me. Why the big secret? Why WON'T they tell us exactly what their ultimate goals are? Why do they NOT attempt to define these concepts like what constitutes consent in a material, REAL, working manner? Define precisely who or what the patriarchy is, beyond just the idea of an invisible cultural hand. If it is a real thing, then give it to us how precisely you DO see all of these things. Then subject your concepts FAIRLY to criticism. It is only in this manner where we can honestly say whether what you say and think is relevant in the greater philosophical sense. If they ARE relevant, and there is a reasonable underpinning to it all, then that truth will out.

My personal take on it is this. The win is a continued sense of relevance in intellectual circles. Controversial views are long for the public eye.

I think that people become invested in their beliefs, no matter whether they are right, wrong, or batshit insane. Our very political system today supplies ample evidence to suggests that so long as you really WANT to believe something is true, you will despite all the evidence to the contrary. I understand that people can feel hurt, or oppressed, or can be treated unfairly. This is life on Earth, and it happens to more people than who would openly say. But you can get invested in that, as well.

The longer you invest yourself in an idea, the stronger you will protect it. The more you indulge the hurt, the greater the pain becomes. The more you convince yourself that you are treated unfairly, the less likely you are to notice when you are not.

However, I don't think that radical feminists are stupid or incapable of reason, although some of the premises they cling to and the conclusions they draw from it might lead me to the latter conclusion. I think they are well aware of what a definition of consent would mean to the philosophy in general, that it would immediately drive holes in the idea that "women are incapable of consent in a patriarchal system," and that they'd have to question their investment in it, and answer criticisms in the larger intellectual sphere as to the validity of their belief structures.