Those were the Italian futurists specifically, not say the American futurians who founded modern science-fiction fandom
edit: also alps front was more elastic than you know belgium and france, so it was less trenches there
Imagine writing > 40 pages on “i think maybe incels are
right”.
As someone who is both disabled and trans, I don’t appreciate that he
co-opts the struggles of my communities.
By the way, “consent” appeared twice in the text and once in a
footnote about a comedy song:
While ostensibly about the nature of consent and the hollowness of
casual sexual hook-ups, there are other lines within the song that might
speak to male entitlement and justify a casual objectifying attitude
towards women.
There could be cases in which [personal mechanisms of sexual
exclusion are] morally justified due to reasons of cost-effectiveness or
triviality, consent, and the fact that other moral ends are satisfied in
the process
[…] providing enlightened sex education (and certain kinds of sex aid
and sex toy [sic]) is something that can be mainstreamed and
thereby benefit everyone (just as consent classes and
anti-discrimination classes can help everyone)
So the first and last occurrence are not actually part of the main
discussion, and the second one is the main reason why we can’t
“distribute sex”, but is then completely glossed over.
Let me guess, the article ignores that sex workers exist and that
incels refuse to go to sex workers (or are so fucking weird sex workers
screen them out, because they (rightfully) fear for their personal
safety), because this is imho an important argument that shows the incel
issue isn’t about sex, but sexual and relational entitlement.
E: did a search in the document, the only mention about sex workers
is that it isn’t morally costless (which is bullshit, and no examples of
‘moral costs’ are given anyway), it is illegal anyway, and making sex
work legal would make everything worse.
This is kind of like reverse Freud, you have to liken sex to getting into an art academy in Vienna in 1910s, to understand what it is about.
Seriously though, I think it is a narcissism thing around failure where others succeed.
>Let me guess, the article ignores that sex workers exist and that incels refuse to go to sex workers (or are so fucking weird sex workers screen them out, because they (rightfully) fear for their personal safety), because this is imho an important argument that shows the incel issue isn't about sex, but sexual and relational entitlement.
there are incels who have used sex workers though, so it's not necessarily 'all incels'
Right from the first footnote this is bad. “This [‘a kiss is not a
contract’] is the title of a song by the satirical/parodic folk duo The
Flight of the Conchords. The meaning of the song is ambiguous. While
ostensibly about the nature of consent and the hollowness of casual
sexual hook-ups, there are other lines within the song that might speak
to male entitlement and justify a casual objectifying attitude towards
women.” Like, does he know what satire is?
Why are allo people? > The obvious reason to treat sexual
experience as a distributive good is that it too is part of what it
takes to live a rich and flourishing life. Sexual experiences (if done
right) are intrinsically pleasurable and enjoyable; they also have great
personal and cultural significance.
I don't understand your comment. Author says it is impossible to live a rich and flourishing life without sex, I call him an a-phobic asshole because that statement is demonstrably false.
He says that, if you don't like sex, you were just not doing it correctly. That is pretty damn close to advocating corrective rape.
[deleted]
I thought all the futurists decided that war was amazing and glorious and advanced and died horribly in muddy trenches.
I’m not suggesting that this one should give it a go, but they did seem ever so keen on that idea back in the day.
Imagine writing > 40 pages on “i think maybe incels are right”.
As someone who is both disabled and trans, I don’t appreciate that he co-opts the struggles of my communities.
By the way, “consent” appeared twice in the text and once in a footnote about a comedy song:
So the first and last occurrence are not actually part of the main discussion, and the second one is the main reason why we can’t “distribute sex”, but is then completely glossed over.
Let me guess, the article ignores that sex workers exist and that incels refuse to go to sex workers (or are so fucking weird sex workers screen them out, because they (rightfully) fear for their personal safety), because this is imho an important argument that shows the incel issue isn’t about sex, but sexual and relational entitlement.
E: did a search in the document, the only mention about sex workers is that it isn’t morally costless (which is bullshit, and no examples of ‘moral costs’ are given anyway), it is illegal anyway, and making sex work legal would make everything worse.
Right from the first footnote this is bad. “This [‘a kiss is not a contract’] is the title of a song by the satirical/parodic folk duo The Flight of the Conchords. The meaning of the song is ambiguous. While ostensibly about the nature of consent and the hollowness of casual sexual hook-ups, there are other lines within the song that might speak to male entitlement and justify a casual objectifying attitude towards women.” Like, does he know what satire is?
https://philpapers.org/archive/DANADO-4.pdf
Why are allo people? > The obvious reason to treat sexual experience as a distributive good is that it too is part of what it takes to live a rich and flourishing life. Sexual experiences (if done right) are intrinsically pleasurable and enjoyable; they also have great personal and cultural significance.