There were a number of great responses to the blather put out by Bettina on sex in marriage and women’s “fragile” libidos and I have gathered together a few of them here for those that may not have seen them. There are quite a few people out there who don’t agree with Bettina, and gosh they write well. Enjoy.
Bluemilk, Richie, Helen Elliott in The Age, and Virginia Haussegger in the Canberra Times. I know I’ve missed at least one really good response that I read last week, so if you have another one please link to it in comments. The previous post in response to Bettina Ardnt’s writing, by Lauredhel, is here.
Categories: gender & feminism, Life, relationships, work and family
96th Down Under Feminists Carnival 
DUFC #69 
Quick Hit: Links I’m loving today 
Quick Hit: Read This 
Hoyden About Town 
New Matilda: A Wife’s Guide To Marital Harmony
IaSL: On Rape and Consent
Rayedish Note to Bettina Arndt
Crikey
Twisty: “Sex therapist” to women: Just close your eyes and think of England”
Meta at FP: Ta
And the maimstream view in comments at Pam Casella’s blog in The West (note fucking ridiculous graphic of smoochfeet)
Apologies to Fuckpoliteness who had already done a round up of these on her blog; and her great response to a Concern Troll
No apologies, I wish that we had roundups like this posted on every street corner right now! The more, the definately merrier!
fuckpoliteness’s last blog post..Sad
I so like Helen Elliot’s response.
I just noticed this quotation from your Random Quotes in the RH sidebar and thought it was a very pertinent response to Bettina, too:
#
I have always thought that one of the crucial features of the analysis of John Stuart Mill was his assertion that it was insufficient for women to be slaves, but that they must be willing slaves if patriarchy is to continue.
Florence Nightingale
#
Small thing – Helen Elliott has two ts at the end of her name.
Thanks Kirsten, fixed now.