So leftists have discovered love and romance

Or have they? Or is it just another vast, uncharted landscape of our culture they haven't marched in and trampled on yet?

Back in May, Hillary Rettig gets on Huffington Post to report on the April Conference on Romance Fiction at Princeton -- but she's really just using it as an excuse to pat herself and liberalism on the back and evilize conservatives. What a surprise, huh.

Take this, for example, from her piece, The Eroticization of Equality and Social Justice. She notes that the "arch-conservative" website Human Events lists Dr. Alfred Kinsey's book Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, a.k.a. The Kinsey Report, as the fourth most harmful book of the 19th and 20th centuries. Then she dramatically asks, "What do conservatives -- and repressive regimes and ideologies the world over -- have against romance, love and sex? Why do they need to control them so much?"

First of all, how is saying that something -- anything -- should be used right, as it was intended -- how is that a need to control? Is telling an obese person they should eat less and healthier food a need to control?

If Rettig cared enough to look, Human Events explained why they consider the book dangerous, with a quote from the Washington Times: “The report included reports of sexual activity by boys—even babies—and said that 37% of adult males had had at least one homosexual experience.... The 1953 book also included reports of sexual activity involving girls younger than age four, and suggested that sex between adults and children could be beneficial,” the Washington Times reported.

Presumably Rettig thinks child-sex is just another manifestation of equality and social justice?

So much of the type of romance Rettig is praising as "progressive" is not about equality and social justice. It's not even about love and romance. It's just more leftist mutation and mutilation of goodness and decency.