I take major issues with this part of the article.

"You could dress like a “skank”….as far as we’re concerned, it’s not objectification, it’s sexual identification, no different from your gender identity."

Actually no, no “we” wouldn’t because that is NOT sexual identification that is dressing in certain manner that has multiple possible meanings, sexual expression being only one of multiple. Example: I know self-identified prudes who dress “skank”, as our “respectable modest” dress was clearly not invented by people living in hot, humid environments. It may be a part of your sexual identity and how you express it but it isn’t how anyone actually identifies. You may identify as a slut and express it by wearing “skank” clothes, but no one identifies simply as "skank clothing wearer", you may wear a "suit and pants" as part of your gender identity and gender presentation but no one identifies as simply suit and pants wearing person (and even if they did your post does not indicate that they actually identify as such meaning your still just labeling).

The biggest irony being that in the process of saying it not objectification you are arguably objectifying this hypothetical woman. Clothing is an object; sexual identification is a private subjective self-identification. You are erasing the subjectivity and instead reducing her (or at least part of her) to her clothing by saying it is her subjectivity. Sexual identification is (by definition) whatever the person say it is and only that it; is not dressing like a “skank” or your sexual behavior it is how a person perceive those thing as being part of their sense of self, if they even perceive them as part of their sense of self.

This statement isn’t sex positive (term I dislike btw but that a topic for another day), it is not something you'll hear if you talk to a sex pozzy as the author claims (she is the first I've ever seen make such a claim). Being "sex positive" is acknowledging and respecting all form of sexual subjectivity, doing so requires acknowledging that we can’t know another sexual subjectivity (sexual and gender identification) based on manner of dress or number of sexual partners. Saying that anything but what a person explicitly states as is their sexual identity (or even a part of it if they don’t believe it as such) is the exact same thing the "sex-negative" people do. less

The actual position of feminism is not that women are better than men. I feel like so many people have been given factually incorrect ideas of what feminism is thanks to bad press in the media and tv that it scares them away from the word. There are no "many ideas of what feminism means" there is what is falsely represented as feminism, and there is actual feminism.

The truth is, if you believe women should be truly equal and have the SAME opportunities and expectations as men do in society, you're already a feminist whether you embrace the word or not. less