The thing that prompted this entire line of thought was that dumb patriarchy museum or whatever it was There was a class of (fourth?) graders going through and in particular one piece was an older fairly obese naked lady just standing there The kids looked really uncomfortable
-
Show this thread
-
and that makes total sense to me, and I was fortunately able to make legible to myself the nature of my objection it's certainly not the exhibit in isolation; I can see it nicely riffing on Celle qui fut la belle heaulmière, frinstance
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
Rather--and maybe this isn't quite as crisp as I'd like--the caricatured left position seems to end up in a place like this, in an uncomfortable aughtistic tangle "By our theory sex and nudity should be mundane human behavior, and by God we will act as if they are so"
2 replies 0 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
For most people, sex is not mundane; it is ecstatic. You can build whatever systems you like to contradict this, and I expect in the long run you will have all the fortune of King Pentheus.
3 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Hmm so there's a desacralisation or profanation angle to this, maybe?
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
yeah I think that's a succinct way of putting it
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
So: "the left tries to desacrilize and that will never work. The right tries to ...prevent monkeys from following monkey urges, and that will never work" ?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Hm! Maybe? I don't quite know whether I can effectively critique a non-caricatured socialcon position because I'm so far removed from it culturally
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
well, I'm smack dab in the middle of it (as a true believer) and here's my steelman of it / steelman of the critique: * socialcons are correct that 1 marriage / 1 sex partner / (relatively) early marriage and family formation lead to the highest achievable human flourishing but
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP @eigenrobot and
2/ this leads a massive gap between puberty (~ age 13 ?) and age-of-best-family-formation (~ age 27 ?), and 99% of people will not / can not navigate those 14 years well, so there is a massive ideal vs achievability gappic.twitter.com/ctX6PCR01h
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes
3/ and in a rich society with contraceptives and cities full of people and dating apps, and 99% of people not being in the top 1% of conscientiousness, mass defections from the ideal are way-beyond-inevitable ...and there are network effects
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP @eigenrobot and
4/ so basically a Moloch-worshipping dating hellscape where people are used and tossed aside, very few are happy, and also there's mass murder of unwanted children seems absolutely inevitable and I'm ready to log off and go despair in a dark cave now
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Alternate theory: most teenagers & young adults should be getting into increasingly long-term relationships that eventually become sexual and eventually have marriage in mind.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
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.