lakoff and his framing are nothing new, of course, but amanda does a great job of employing this idea - especially how people think in, and relate to, metaphors and similes - to explain the fundamental divide about sex in this country, and ultimately between fundies and feminists. to be certain, these frames she uses are two ends of a spectrum, but in a media where everything is binary, i think it's reasonable to talk about it in these terms.
I’d say the two major metaphorical frames about sex would be the conservative-sexist one and the liberal-feminist one. The conservative-sexist metaphorical framework of sex is Sex As Conquest. In this frame, women’s bodies are objects and sex is about the struggle to conquer the pussy...If sexual intercourse happens, by definition, the man who gets to fuck the woman has won...[s]ex happens when women surrender, in this model.
...[t]hese separate models of what sex is explain why threads about rape turn into hellholes pretty quickly—sexists and feminists aren’t even speaking the same language, in a sense. The conservative-sexist model of rape is the same one used to define a foul in basketball. Basically, when sexual intercourse happens, the man team has scored a point against the woman team. Each team is allowed some strategies and disallowed others. In basketball, you’re supposed to snatch the ball from the other team, but you can’t cross certain lines or you’ll get a foul. This explains why rape trolls are so eager to find out what the “rules” are, i.e. when they are permitted to force sex. (”Is it rape if she’s drunk? What if she says yes and changes her mind? Is it okay to bully someone into it, so long as you don’t actually hold her down and force her? Are guilt trips okay?, etc.”)
ok, i'm really leaving now. all packed and everything. see you next weekend.