I see that you wrote elsewhere that "giving cash in compensation for low sex" might be a solution to the problem you're describing that doesn't abrogate consent. But there are problems with that as well.
-
-
Replying to @studentactivism @robinhanson
First, "lack of access to sex" is neither quantifiable nor an externality. How would you determine eligibility for subsidy? Also: subsidizing people who aren't having sex is only a solution to their problem if we assume universal interest in, and access to, sex workers' services.
3 replies 4 retweets 68 likes -
Replying to @studentactivism
There are also many complexities in implementing income redistribution. My comments don't have much to do with these details, as long as advocates do have some specific details that they propose.
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @robinhanson
"What does it mean to lack access to sex?" isn't a minor question in a discussion of compensating people who supposedly lack access to sex.
4 replies 3 retweets 114 likes -
Replying to @studentactivism @robinhanson
Am I alone in worrying about this legitimization of incel It strikes me as a word created to provide manipulator a language to groom young boys to be hateful
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Peace4all17 @robinhanson
I think it's fine to use it as long as we're clear when we do that it does not refer to "people who want to have sex with somebody but are unable to find someone to have sex with."
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @studentactivism @robinhanson
My concern is with elevating a concept that possibly was created to encourage vulnerable boys to embrace arresting sexual development The cat is already out of the bag but I feel like this language coming from reddit was purposely designed and all usages aids in its mission
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Peace4all17
I hear you. But I think at this point there's far more danger in not acknowledging the phenomenon than in acknowledging it, and naming it is necessary to that process.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @studentactivism
But there's danger in using their words. We can talk about sexual development without it and the words are being used by Hanson & others to pervert logic & decency Angus you're great I dont question your motives it's something that has truly hit me after reading stuff about milo
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Peace4all17
I don't feel like you're pushing at me in an aggressive way. We're good. And the question is a good one. My view is that there's this thing out there called the "incel" movement, and we need to talk about it publicly, so we need to use the name.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
And honestly, part of my thinking on it being okay to use the name is that the name itself is weird and gross and off-putting. Nobody's going to hear "incel" in isolation and think "I want to get in on that!" It's all in the framing.
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.