Sexuality as a Social Construct

Reading Catharine A. Mackinnon's "Sexuality" confused me. I don't think I fully grasped the concept of what she was talking about. I think her point was to use Feminist Theory as a means to explain sexuality. She writes "A theory of sexuality becomes feminist to the extent it treats sexuality as a social cosntruct of male power:defined by men, forced on women, and constitutive in the meaning of gender." So basically in our society sexuality has been defined in terms of men, and in their favor. By using Feminsit Theory to analyze sexuality, we as a society have to take sexuality for what it is (in Mackinnon's case, male-dominated and defined), and by doing this we can begin to change it.
One question that Mackinnon brought up that I think was really interesting and a very valid question was whether what defines women as different is the same as what defines them as inferior, which in turn would be used to define women's sexuality. This was interesting to me because I remember talking about this in Intro. to Women's Studies. For example, some may think that the difference in sexual organs between men and women is what makes men superior and what makes women inferior, which in turn would define sexuality for women as being oppresive, while men's sexuality would be dominant. Another point that Mackinnon brought up was the fact that some people do not consider rape an act of sex, but moreso an act of violence, but to agree with her, if the man wanted to be violent why wouldn't he just hit her? I think that rape is an act of physical abuse (violence) as well as sexual abuse (violence) and should be treated as such.