I'm pretty sure you're wrong. Institutionalized anything is when [thing] becomes part of the fabric of life, so that it's just accepted and naturalized (or nearly so).

"But institutionalized sexism doesn't have to mean that its practitioners are terrible people who want to bring women down. It can also be people who don't know what they don't know, and take for granted that everyone else knows the same things"

I think that it's less "anti-Israel" and more "dedicated to reporting facts," which just tends to look bad for Israel. American news seems awfully pro-Israel because they either do not report all the facts or they bury them. I remember Anderson Cooper reporting on the Israeli-Lebanon conflict in 2006, and he was like,…

I wonder how he accounts for gay men who don't like showtunes? They do exist, you know.

Did you read my final note, about how for some individuals it's about enjoyable fun? Because that's the opposite of pigeonholing. I was talking about the cultural obsession with anal sex—which is a relatively new phenomenon. The cultural obsession with anal sex is about domination, even if the act isn't necessarily.…

"the most nefarious aspect of my own sorority initiation involved collecting rolls of toilet paper"

This is kind of old, but here's Naomi Wolf on Yale's response to her (two-decades-post-graduation) allegations of sexual misconduct from a professor. Harold Bloom, of all people (YECH!).

To be fair: that was an American dude's interpretation of consent in France. So it doesn't negate the OP's suggestion that American male sexuality is about domination. In fact it kind of proves it.

It's become a sign of dominance. Most women don't want anal, but if you can convince a girl to let you fuck her in the ass then it means she's been subordinated to your desires. Or so the logic goes.

Sounds like it's creating jobs. Green jobs, even.

The truth is definitely an absurdly liberal agenda. But that's only because the conservative agenda is absurd and fictional.

This is the best thing I've ever read on Jezebel. Ever.

I've never met an actual man-person who is mature/responsible/not a douche, who was uninterested in funny women. Of the men I'd consider my friends—which, granted, is a fairly low number—all are interested in funny women. Of the men I can stand to hang out with (but would not call my friends), all are interested in…

This is hilarious. You know that people can, actually, be arrested just for saying something? Like, if I got a bunch of 15 year old kids with guns together and told them that murdering the president is the best thing ever. I would probably get arrested for that, even if I didn't actually kill anyone. It's called…

Being "politically incorrect" (which is also called "being rude") isn't content. You can't read "political incorrectness."

Ah hahaha me too!

"in an area where the local men (some, not all) have dramatically different understanding of women and western women"

A difference between 1% and 3% may seem like nothing when it's a single couple—it is, after all, only a difference of 2%. But because it's a differential across gender lines on a large-scale, your own experience may either be contrary to the study, or you may not notice the subtle (but existent) difference.

Oh I know. I was just pointing out that there is definite gayness in Shakespeare.

I haven't read Measure for Measure recently enough to say much about it. I've just happened to have done tons of work on R&J so I know it very well, but I've never written about Measure for Measure so I'm not able to give an easy response.