Not sure there's a choice. The allure of the taboo draws people in, even when they are not interested in the acts themselves.
We should instead tailor education to assume that boys and girls will find a way to access porn.
What the Hell is this? Of course they're "entitled" to their own bodies. What the Hell does she think, that she should be able to force them to have sex with her just because they're White and she's Black? She's a goddamned incel, treating others like props for her gratification.
Plus, since this apparently needs to be said, defending a rapist makes you a horrible person. Splitting hairs about what is and isn't rape is defending a rapist.
I read the whole article, but at this sentence I reached for Cmd+W, which was done via muscle memory as my eyes were rolled so far back into my head.
Also, yes, dating effectively means sex and trying to defend a rapist by splitting hairs makes you horrible.
The author didn’t mention bodies, but minds. The author wrotes the men said they would not even “date” a black woman
The men presumably are attracted to women, but said they would not date a woman of black skin
> One of them mentioned he wouldn’t date a black woman.
> Are they entitled to have this preference
Pressuring someone into sex is disgusting, and horrible, and it doesn't matter who's doing it or why.
Part of me thinks it’s maybe interesting to bring up to people who have a genuine openness and are unaware of such subjects. But then it feels like to even read a collection of said articles, you must be a bit in the know about these subjects already if not a complete nerd about them.
I’ve seen this type of “I’m just asking questions” talk in many places and it does feel disingenuous almost exclusively. It’s quite rare to see a completely balanced take where they have no idea what the correct solution is. It looks like in this collection, Amia does give their own opinions even though they say at times they don’t have any idea what is best. It rubs that it’s disingenuous.
The problem is that I’d like to send such things along to people I know to get them more informed about various subjects but when there’s a slant as evident here - I never want to. So annoying that everyone has to shove their opinion into everything even when they act like they’re not. Just own it.
Its a good article and a balanced discussion about feminism would be very nice to have here...
Saying people's preferences are "Problematic" is a way to pressure them into sex: "You're a horrible person if you don't have sex with me!"
Okay I'm half joking, but this crowd of people is simply incapable of having such discussions without the thread turning into a pile of garbage very quickly because of a no-no word in the title. (Not talking about the word sex, but feminism.)
I love having such discussions, but it's not happening here for my own sanity.
There's the usual torturing of definitions of word that pisses me off on HN (like when someone tried to convince people that flying is like running except you don't touch the ground) but in this thread there are weird accusations of call to rape based on the worst interpretation possible of an excerpt of the article.
It kinda put into perspective (and in a negative light) all the other posts that deals with philosophy or social issues.
I'm tired of everything being flagged on HN that has even a 1% chance of painting feminism or something female-related in a negative light. I believe the community at large is able to have an honest discussion, but a certain minority of users keep shutting it down by flagging submissions before it even has a chance to begin.
Man, I've been taking the wrong courses!
As in the therapy example: attraction might develop between the student & teacher. Instead of participating, the teacher should recognize/be aware that this exist but channel it back toward learning
It's a massive violation.
She offers a clinical yet sexually charged analysis of porn with no policy proposals (heaven forbid). Could there be a greater cliche in the Humanities departments of modern universities? Oh wait, of course she wants safe, legal sex work as well. Bingo!
She wants to eroticize pedagogy, but also make sure the college administration is there to manage it. Oh, the frisson! Reference to Fraud, er Freud? Check! OH WOW! SUCH FREUD!
Freudianism was/is a pseudo-scientific cult that only lit-crit academics and $200/hr therapists still take seriously. Along with its marxist offshoots, its radical political program was instrumental in the 20th century european/american cultural suicide that had its death rattle in the 60s counter-culture victory. Our modern malaise, including the ubiquitous porn rotting our children's sexual health is the creature of those flower-power radicals.
But it's just "Porn" in the abstract. Not the creation of actual people whom it would be fairly easy to constrain if there is a cultural will to do so. But hiding that fact behind the massive force of inevitable abstractions demoralizes the people, er "consumers", to the point of impotence. Essayists like this loathsome academic are the priestly caste of the modern world, they baffle and confuse decent people.
Why is that a problem? As long as people aren't coerced/forced into it, where's the harm?
The article doesn't actually seem to touch on "the right to sex" (it mentions it once, as a position held by some incels). I thought that would be an interesting discussion, and especially how it relates to the "right to reproduce" (and the perception by some that it is impossible in the present economy).
The two are connected, of course, by biological necessity. If no woman wants a man, then that man is unable to reproduce. I am told that in the semi-near future, it will be possible for such men to reproduce by means of artificial wombs. (And equally so for women, who do not wish to undergo pregnancy, yet desire children.)
Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought-terminating_clich%C3%A...
