I insulted you not because I'd "lost the argument" but out of frustration with your failure to engage with any of the points other people were making in the argument. To paraphrase so far:
OP: Look at this bonkers example of feminism gorn mad.
poster 1: Yup, it's mad
poster 2: Yup, it's mad, but it's within a tradition of examining why society centres PIV
OP: What, you're not going to agree it's mad?
poster 2: I said it was mad, but it does raise the interesting question of why, given that a lot of women don't orgasm from PIV and PIV has health risks (pregnancy, STDs), it is so central to our concept of sexuality.
Other posters: Yes, that's interesting. (Most of them: I personally like PIV, but it's interesting to ask the question isn't it?)
OP: If you don't agree she's mad, you're like moderate Muslims who refuse to condemn ISIS.
Other posters: steady on. (a) we've said we don't agree with what she says, (b) it doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it, (c) it's only a blog online, ISIS are really killing people.
OP: But she's got another blog post where she says she'd like to kill all men.
poster 1: But she's not going to, is she? Whereas ISIS, sex selective abortion, killing women worldwide in domestic violence - that really happens.
poster 2: And in any case she didn't say all men, she said the ones who'd committed crimes of violence - so not so different from, say, mainstream American Republicans in that opinion.
OP: If you won't agree she's mad then it's your fault women get turned off by feminism.
And repeat, over and over again, like Groundhog day.
We made it to over 500 posts before one of us cracked, but congratulations OP, you can now add another tick in your anti-feminist bingo card: "a feminist was once slightly nasty to me on line (after sustained goady fuckery which I won't mention) so now I'm going to be quite justified in claiming henceforth that feminists are all incredibly nasty to everyone all the time."