Not endorsing the rest of the thread but this point is worth a thought.https://twitter.com/1renist/status/1005434819591987203 …
-
-
Replying to @systemergent
so enforced monogamy is telling a man he can't have a steak because a baby can't chew it yeah, checks out
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
Babies grow up, though. (Also, the notion of enforced monogamy is repugnant and one can only hope it fades away.)
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @systemergent
that's the argument, though, right? the poors need enforced monogamy to be happy so everybody needs enforced monogamy otherwise it's mean to the poors? which at object level means, as always, that non-elite women need to stop thinking they have elite options like divorce?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
Or we can read it as "average people for the most part struggle under sexual mores that elites find congenial" -- whatever the intentions of the OP. There are those who want to ban divorce and institute other bad and zany policies, and I do not want any part of that.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @systemergent
yeah. i mean, it's an argument, and there could be something to it. it smells pretty strongly of leaning heavily on condescension, though. my experience of "average people" tends to indicate they can handle complex-as-shit sexual mores without particularly blinking
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
Fair. Maybe the issue is not so much "can this person handle this particular non-standard arrangement" (they probably can or they wouldn't be in it) but pushing people to be open to all the degrees of freedom "which you would be if you were cool and not a prig"...I don't know.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @systemergent
tbh OP doesn't scan as talking about psychologically handling arrangements so much as "flourish" sounds economic, i.e. the norm being lionized is the one where every man gets a sex/housekeeping/childrearing slave assigned and this provides him a stable base to pursue wealth from
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @chaosprime
OP may well believe that, but on their face the words could mean that social pressure to pair off (in any kind of pair) in a long-term committed relationship helps to foster the material success of a nation through the emotional stability of its households.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @systemergent
*nodnod* it just feels ass-backward to me. under circumstances of impoverishment we formed pairbonds and stuck with them even when they fucking sucked, to survive. so now that we're not so impoverished we need to... act as though we were, because the norm was just so great?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Chaos Retweeted Chaos
Chaos added,
-
-
Replying to @chaosprime
Though we carry our brutality within us, always ready to go. Side note: the gig economy has replaced one sort of developed-world brutality with another. Maybe better angels and all that, okay, but still
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.