This exemplifies your error: Viewing pre-sexual revolution sex through rose-colored glasses. Today's incels weren't in healthy, happy marriages in the 1950s. They're misogynist now, and they were misogynist then. The difference is between "involuntary celibacy" and spousal rape.https://twitter.com/DouthatNYT/status/992050300486864896 …
-
-
That being said, it's true that 21st century society (in US and many other countries) teaches that sex is part of the good life, and there are people who want sex but do not, for whatever reason, find willing partners.
Show this thread -
The incel community is unremittingly awful. But there are normal people--of various ages, genders, sizes, socioeconomic status, abilities--who want sex but can't find willing partners. Is that a societal problem? Not sure. But there is a disconnect with this and a pro-sex culture
Show this thread -
If we accept that this sexual disconnect is a societal problem, sex robots strike me as the least bad solution. Objects fulfill desire; no subject has to be coerced.
@DouthatNYT calls this dystopian. But "redistributing" sex by returning to 1950s mores sounds much worse. (END)Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Tend to agree that his view of the sexual revolution is way too negative. But I just don't get the continued conflation with sexually frustrated lonely men vs incels. I think he's mainly talking about the first group.
-
He used incels as a jumping off point for his argument. But I agree that he's talking about sexually frustrated lonely people (mostly, but not exclusively men).
End of conversation
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.