Intro Critical Feminist Studies Paper #1/Intercourse

Lots for us to talk about, kscire.

I'm confused. I can't tell, from your analysis, whether you are in agreement with Dworkin's argument that all heterosexual intercourse is a form of rape (you say, for instance, that you "have often felt that physical intimacy beween men and wome is invasive and somehow subordinates women"). But elsewhere, you seem to disagree with her (saying that "intercourse can't be a social expression of male power if this power requires the consent of a woman to be 'dominated'").

I'm confused, too, by the huge amount of "power" you give to Dworkin in this essay: a good portion of the piece is made up of quotations from her work, and you write as though--because she made these claims? I don't follow this--they have been universally embraced (i.e.: "everyone is just so fixated on male dominance that everyone, both men and women, are blind to a more rewarding, reciprocal, sexual relationship"). I'd certainly agree that Dworkin is unable to imagine such a relationship (and she is very clear about her reasons), but it's not clear to me how you get from her beliefs to that of "everyone."

Perhaps my real question here has to do with matters of argumentation and proof. What is Dworkin's evidence for the claims she makes? What is yours? You say in conclusion, for instance, that men's "need to dominate" is proof of their weakness. How does proof work, in making that claim? Can it be proved? What would count as evidence?