Ross Dothan's NYTimes column about "The Redistribution of Sex" is a great example of why people who are not well-versed in sexuality as a field should not be writing about topics as fraught as incels and their violent demands of more sexual gratification from women.
-
Show this thread
-
Our response to incels should NOT be a thought experiment about sex robots + government sex redistribution programs. It should be a blistering disavowal of their violent, misogynist worldview, and a conversation about creating a healthier, more respectful sexual culture for all.
52 replies 1,474 retweets 5,793 likesShow this thread -
Ross Douthat makes a grave mistake taking incels at their word that they can't get laid and conflating them with marginalized groups considered unattractive for bigoted reasons. Incels could get laid if they didn't hate women and feel entitled to *hot* women.
41 replies 494 retweets 3,478 likesShow this thread -
I think we do have a right to a healthy sex life: to access to sexual healthcare, to a society free of sexual shame. But we do not have a right to other peoples' bodies, and that's what the incels believe. They don't feel entitled to sexual pleasure, they feel entitled to women.
28 replies 888 retweets 4,530 likesShow this thread -
"I expect the logic of commerce and technology will be consciously harnessed... to address the unhappiness of incels, be they angry and dangerous or simply depressed and despairing." The incel worldview is inherently sexist. Their unhappiness is really hatred.
11 replies 187 retweets 1,970 likesShow this thread
You are 100% right. When I was unable to find a girlfriend and depressed about it the “logic of commerce and technology” wouldn't have done anything to make me feel worthy and deserving. It won't fix incel's hate either.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.