He said “men like watching porn about lesbians.” I said if they were hot, “men are more than happy to watch.” Show me again how these two statements are so different?
Merry Christmas.
“Show me again how these two statements are so different?”
I will try.
What PB said was this: “It’s also the reason why men like watching porn about lesbians. One naked girl is good, two naked girls are better.”
What you said was this: “It’s funny; if they’re two hot young women with lots of hair and a fine set of haunches, men are more than happy to watch them kiss.”
PB’s comment does not show malice or scorn for men. Yours does. It seems to me, therefore, that PB’s comment leaves room for acknowledgement of men who do not watch porn at all. Yours does not.
His remark explains why men would like to watch porn about lesbians. Your remark is a shot at men.
When I first read your remark, I thought that it left no room for exceptions. You demonstrated this to be the case by arguing in subsequent notes that responses on this thread demonstrate that men—all men—like to watch porn, and porn about lesbians in particular.
All you had to say was, “Okay, it’s not all men.” Or you could have ignored me.
Instead, when I told you that you were painting with too broad a brush, you replied, “Oh yeah? Take a look at the responses.” That is clearly a denial that applying your remarks to all men is painting with too broad a brush. In sum, it is an assertion that your remark does indeed apply to all men.
Then you tried to make trouble between PB and me, which I find puzzling. I know that some men like to watch porn, and porn about lesbians in particular. I’m sure he knows that some men do not watch porn. I don’t really see what you expected the argument to be.
Perhaps it does come as a surprise to you, but there are many men who do not consume porn in any form.
I hope we can drop this petty little squabble now.