@Karmaze's banner p

Karmaze


				

				

				
2 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 05 18:46:30 UTC

				

User ID: 678

Karmaze


				
				
				

				
2 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 05 18:46:30 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 678

I mean, that's not a surprise TBH. Like I said, I could do an in-depth analysis of the song, and its active rejection of the Male Gender Role as a romantic value and breaking the related patterns. (Note: Even though I think it's the best for me personally, because that's my personal aesthetic, at the same time, I don't think it's realistic at all)

Common? I don't know. But I think I'll go to my grave probably thinking that the best song from a f->m romantic perspective is Simple and Clean. Yes, the one from Kingdom Hearts.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=0qxdwfxbONM

Honestly, I could do an in-depth analysis of the lyrics of this song, especially in terms of modern gender politics and relationships. (And what, this is like almost 20 years old at this point?) But my hand is busted so I don't feel like typing too much.

If anyone has a suggested reply that won't get them fired or un-personed, I'm all ears.

I think this might get you fired/un-personed faster, but here's my answer.

The problem is much less "white supremacy" or "patriarchy" and much more something having to do with socioeconomic and networking effects. The problem is that we don't really have a meritocracy right now, due to these forces. By focusing on these things, we can create something more of a meritocracy. The focus on identity, frankly, is an unconscious bias to push away from any sort of need for self-sacrifice from fixing these issues. It's not a solution to the problems that they're pointing to. Truth is, I believe that Neo-Progressive politics amplify these socioeconomic and networking effects.

Going back to the OP, this is what I believe "expanding" Critical Theory looks like. I think it looks like including these other, largely non-identitarian facets of power, privilege and bias into the equation. And I think it's absolutely a non-starter. My belief remains that people will abandon Critical Theory as a whole once that process starts (and I still do think it will start eventually). But I do think people react badly to this sort of thing, because it's seen (not necessarily incorrectly) as a demand that they set themselves on fire to keep other people warm.

That said, I think the activist Right are essentially reacting to the same human impulse.

Furthermore why do we care so much about the psychological impacts of prostitution when we don't care about how the feelings of garbage men or plumbers are affected by their jobs?

It's much less garbage men or plumbers, (the people I know who do these things seem to be satisfied with the job itself) and much more telemarketers, retail/service employees and so on.

I don't think sex work is for everybody. And for reasons, I wouldn't make it into expected work, as in, expecting people on welfare to do it. But at the same time, I can see how it would be some people's cup of tea.

Truth be told, I think the trad-sex elements of some forms of conservatism to be well..missing the point I think. It's not that I think they're misidentifying the problem...increasing amounts of men seem to be incapable of fulfilling roles that are broadly seen as desired (even if people like to pretend that's not the case), but the problem isn't really in the sexual sphere. Because of that the solutions are all wrong. Porn/Prostitution in this way are fillers for people who have internalized ideas that either the male gender role is bad, or lack the skills to perform the male gender role.

My main problem with Wokeism is that it really struggles to answer whether it actually delivers what it promises to. A Buddhist monk, a nun, and an EA (as far as I know) have a good sense of what they're getting into and what they'll get from it. In contrast, the effectiveness of woke policies on actually improving the wellbeing of the disadvantaged (what its adherents actually want) runs the entire gauntlet from effective to counter productive, while cultivating a culture that has no qualms about deliberately misrepresenting the empirics.

This is the big difference between the two, in my mind. More specifically, I think Wokism (Neo-Progressivism) is a culture-focused, externalizing memeset, where EA is a highly materialist, internalizing memeset. (And I think I'm being accurate in the former...as someone who has internalized NP ideas in the past, I've been told a lot that you're not actually supposed to do that. You're not supposed to actually self-deconstruct).

If you want to get into religion, I think there are versions of religion that run that particular gamut. There are culture-focused externalizing types and materialist focused internalizing types.

I am partisan in that I think the latter, materialist route is the only thing sustainable, but I can steelman the culturalist approach, in that it's focused on politics and structures and how to change them. I just don't think it'll be successful, because human nature will twist it for personal gain.

Gender dysphoria, at least for me, is something that makes sense that it exists to a degree. I have compassion for people with it, and I think we should do what we can to best help them (within reason). My major concern about it, is something akin to what I think about body dysphoria....I'm worried about social pressure that might actually causes these various forms of dysphoria. And because of that, I'm not convinced that everybody with Gender dysphoria is best served by transitioning. Some people would be better served with understanding and dealing with those social and cultural pressures.