While this was a great start, there is a paragraph in this statement that isn't shown in your screenshot that I find problematic:

"I am still a fan of the “No Produce Rule” - No buns, bananas, or breasts need to be seen. But why are stomachs overtly sexual? Why is a little cleavage sinful? Why are women meant to feel they are responsible for men’s actual sin of lust?"

1) If we are going to protect women, one of the steps we need to take is to desexualize the breasts. The idea of breasts as obscene and sexual is a huge part of rape culture. Interestingly, he doesn't include vulvas in this list of "produce" but breasts make the cut? Hmmm...odd, and again, very problematic.

2) He brings up that we should stop blaming women for "men's actual sin of lust" - the first part of that is great. The second part is just more rape culture. Lust isn't a sin, nor is it confined to men. Even as he is challenging the narrative about men not being able to control themselves, he slips up here and leans back into that story, and further entrenches purity culture with the idea that sexual desire is a sin.

I'm glad to see us moving in a better direction, but we still have a long way to go!