Yes, that’s the other Scott. Scott Alexander tries to project an air of sexual superiority, while Scott Aaronsson’s whole self-identification is that it’s a literal gift from God that he managed to find someone to marry.
Same, I can seldom tell if people are talking of the SSC anagram namesake guy or the other guy, and usually don’t want to either. If it’s the Dilbert guy I can usually tell by the context. And I worry there might be one or more notable treacles with the last name Scott to make it even more confusing.
Personally, I have better things to keep track of and you probably have as well.
I could not remember seeing Alexander talk about his sexuality, and all I recall was somebody in r/ssc complaining that we didn’t know he was anhedonic (which is weird, as I found him talk about his sexual feelings, like the poster didn’t get what asexuality means (unless he talked about this more and I missed it)). But I looked it up, and I found this:
"Applying enough charity to fully fund the Red Cross for the next fifty years, [name of neo-nazi pickupartist removed] seems to be saying something along the lines of “Polyamory is especially well-suited for asexual people”. And I agree!
Many of the people I know in successful polyamorous relationships are sexual, sometimes even highly sexual. But I also know a disproportionate number of asexual polyamorous people – including myself – and the combination seems to work really, really well."
So yeah, his sexual superiority comes from being an ace poly person I guess (not sure where you got that from his writings, but whatever. Do wonder why he feels the need to interact with (at least intellectually) and link to people who want him to stop existing for several reasons whoever, esp as this is not really extended towards the left (and for the record I don’t want him to stop existing)).
What I should have written is that I believe Alexander is a person who wants to give the impression that sexuality doesn’t define him. His is a life of the mind, after all.
Fair enough, my effort post was more about how the anhedonic remark and how I didn’t find proof in the past (but kept it in mind) and that I found proof he talked about his asexuality btw. (I either didn’t look hard in the past or forgot I found the proof before already).
Maybe the 2 Scotts represent the 2 poles of TREACLES sexuality - on the one hand, the effortless “I’m too sexy for my shirt, all the girls want me, but I will not give in to the pleasures of the flesh”, on the other the seething resentment that hot girls are denied them. I dunno, this has led to me thinking way too much about the sex lives of 2 people I really cannot stand.[1]
[1] that said, I’m pretty sure Aaronson would at least try to be a good dad. But maybe I’m being too generous.
Isn’t that the other Scott? Or are both Scotts now involved. (I don’t have the time for additional psychic damage today, so im not going to check).
Yes, that’s the other Scott. Scott Alexander tries to project an air of sexual superiority, while Scott Aaronsson’s whole self-identification is that it’s a literal gift from God that he managed to find someone to marry.
deleted by creator
Same, I can seldom tell if people are talking of the SSC anagram namesake guy or the other guy, and usually don’t want to either. If it’s the Dilbert guy I can usually tell by the context. And I worry there might be one or more notable treacles with the last name Scott to make it even more confusing.
Personally, I have better things to keep track of and you probably have as well.
Don’t* forget Adams! We have at least 3 horrible Scott A’s.
*or do
I could not remember seeing Alexander talk about his sexuality, and all I recall was somebody in r/ssc complaining that we didn’t know he was anhedonic (which is weird, as I found him talk about his sexual feelings, like the poster didn’t get what asexuality means (unless he talked about this more and I missed it)). But I looked it up, and I found this:
"Applying enough charity to fully fund the Red Cross for the next fifty years, [name of neo-nazi pickupartist removed] seems to be saying something along the lines of “Polyamory is especially well-suited for asexual people”. And I agree!
Many of the people I know in successful polyamorous relationships are sexual, sometimes even highly sexual. But I also know a disproportionate number of asexual polyamorous people – including myself – and the combination seems to work really, really well."
Source: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/27/cuddle-culture/
So yeah, his sexual superiority comes from being an ace poly person I guess (not sure where you got that from his writings, but whatever. Do wonder why he feels the need to interact with (at least intellectually) and link to people who want him to stop existing for several reasons whoever, esp as this is not really extended towards the left (and for the record I don’t want him to stop existing)).
What I should have written is that I believe Alexander is a person who wants to give the impression that sexuality doesn’t define him. His is a life of the mind, after all.
More closeted then ace from what I’ve been tood - but thats common in this scene.
Fair enough, my effort post was more about how the anhedonic remark and how I didn’t find proof in the past (but kept it in mind) and that I found proof he talked about his asexuality btw. (I either didn’t look hard in the past or forgot I found the proof before already).
Don’t apologize, I was talking out of my ass.
Maybe the 2 Scotts represent the 2 poles of TREACLES sexuality - on the one hand, the effortless “I’m too sexy for my shirt, all the girls want me, but I will not give in to the pleasures of the flesh”, on the other the seething resentment that hot girls are denied them. I dunno, this has led to me thinking way too much about the sex lives of 2 people I really cannot stand.[1]
[1] that said, I’m pretty sure Aaronson would at least try to be a good dad. But maybe I’m being too generous.
“polarity of TREACLES sexuality” is an infohazard, damn you :P
deleted by creator