Many nowadays believe that homophobia is itself a problem. The truth is homophobia is a symptom of the larger problem of sexphobia. Sexphobia is the belief that sex should not be, as Citizen Sade put it; "Sex is as important as eating or drinking and we ought to allow the one appetite to be satisfied with as little restraint or false modesty as the other."

This is sexphobia & is the root of homophobia & transphobia. By denying that sex is a right feminists deny the right to sexual liberation. They are therefore sexual reactionaries who prolong the symptom of homophobia. Feminists are prudes & need urgent re-education.

Those who deny sexphobia are prudes & sexual conservatives & statists.

May I ask how the "right to sex" should be upheld? What if someone doesn't want to have sex with you?

*Yawn

Also, what's the difference between a prude and a sexual conservative?

(January 29, 2014 at 5:41 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: May I ask how the "right to sex" should be upheld? What if someone doesn't want to have sex with you?

Then it is society's responsibility to allow all people to express sexual interest so all people can have mutually desired sex with each other. In modern PC feminazi society one cannot express sexual interest without causing one of those bullshit "sexual harassment". Unless of course one is female.

Wait. So, because you can't get laid, it's society's responsibility to get you laid? No thanks. You're on your own.

Quote:By denying that sex is a right feminists deny the right to sexual liberation.

This is a sentiment often voiced by men who couldn't get laid in a woman's prison with a hat-full of pardons.

Boru

(January 29, 2014 at 5:41 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: May I ask how the "right to sex" should be upheld? What if someone doesn't want to have sex with you?

What are you on about? If he wants sex, he must get it! Duh, it is his right! You can't deny him that which he is entitled to. Give him sex now... and get him a sandwich! He is entitled to food, so it makes sense to give him both while you are at it.

(January 29, 2014 at 5:43 pm)EgoRaptor Wrote:

(January 29, 2014 at 5:41 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: May I ask how the "right to sex" should be upheld? What if someone doesn't want to have sex with you?

Then it is society's responsibility to allow all people to express sexual interest so all people can have mutually desired sex with each other. In modern PC feminazi society one cannot express sexual interest without causing one of those bullshit "sexual harassment".

Depends on the level of expression. I have no problem with people looking at me, so long as they don't become obsessive about it (following around, etc). I have no problem with flirting - we all do it. But "not interested" means just that and unwanted touching will get a response from being told to fuck off or, in extreme situations, a kick to the groin (in social situations) or told to fuck off and then an harassment complaint (in a work/business situation).

(January 29, 2014 at 5:45 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Wait. So, because you can't get laid, it's society's responsibility to get you laid? No thanks. You're on your own.

You are clearly just a feminazi who wants to keep PC "sexual harassment" laws. It is just as much a society's duty to ensure all its members are sexually satisfied as it is to ensure that all members have sufficient water & food.