Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

ahalbert.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 87 posts

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#51

Post by bradlys »

I often wonder who the audience is for subjects like this. One where someone essentially is what I’d consider a shit stirrer. I’m referencing the articles by Amia - not the summarizations here.

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.

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#52

Post by [deleted] »

maze-le wrote: post #18
msla wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author questions whether men are "entitled" to their own bodies. 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!"

Yes and if you'd continued to read the article, you would have noticed that this situation is used as an example about the problematic aspects of sexuality in our society -- its a segue to an argument, not the argument itself. > You are not entitled to sex with anyone, but people can have preferences that are problematic You rather took this one line out of context and interpreted in the worst possible way.

[deleted]

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#53

Post by andai »

(Tried posting this 5 hours ago, but the article was briefly "[dead]".)

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.)

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#54

Post by falcolas »

vacuity wrote: post #49
falcolas wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> whether that's something we want as a society needs to happen 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.

Do you mean that sex ed classes should discuss how porn affects expectations of sex? That does seem reasonable.

Yup. Reasonable, and perhaps even required. Similar to sex itself, aside from "abstinence only" positions on porn, there's very little open or fact-driven discussion about it.

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#55

Post by smitty1e »

fullshark wrote: post #9

Some day an honest conversation about how in our current internet landscape boys learn about sex through consuming hardcore pornography before they even kiss someone and whether that's something we want as a society needs to happen.

Until we re-prioritize the f-word--family--the rest of the discussion is tangential.

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#56

Post by ahalbert »

vacuity wrote: post #49
falcolas wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> whether that's something we want as a society needs to happen 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.

Do you mean that sex ed classes should discuss how porn affects expectations of sex? That does seem reasonable.

The author thinks that porn literacy is a good thing, but she notes that it's difficult to teach students to read texts you can't show them.

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#57

Post by vacuity »

foogazi wrote: post #50
vacuity wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's fair to say that for this book dating implies having sex, since it's peak intimacy. The title starts with "The Right to Sex" and the article mentions sex a lot.

> I think it's fair to say that for this book dating implies having sex There’s dates without sex and sex without dates Dating implies a lot of things: relationships, sex and a path for love, marriage, family

> The title starts with "The Right to Sex" and the article mentions sex a lot.

I'm not saying dating literally means having sex. I'm saying in this context sex is a logical progression from dating.

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#58

Post by vacuity »

tehwebguy wrote: post #42
msla wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're trying to defend someone who wants to use the language of social justice to pressure others into sex. Pressuring someone into sex is disgusting, and horrible, and it doesn't matter who's doing it or why.

She’s not trying to pressure anyone into sex, this is probably the most disingenuous read someone could make.

The blog author doesn't actually make it clear if the line

> You are not entitled to sex with anyone, but people can have preferences that are problematic.

is spoken from their perspective or the book author's perspective. It's not a given that they agree with that sentiment. So it might be that the blog author briefly entertained their question of entitlement as a consideration before arriving at the conclusion quoted above, or they still favor it.

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#59

Post by vacuity »

msla wrote: post #47
input_sh wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because social studies scare HN readers. 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.

I'm not scared, I'm angry that this rape apologia is being defended.

The blog author doesn't actually make it clear if the line

> You are not entitled to sex with anyone, but people can have preferences that are problematic.

is spoken from their perspective or the book author's perspective. It's not a given that they agree with that sentiment. So it might be that the blog author briefly entertained their question of entitlement as a consideration before arriving at the conclusion quoted above, or they still favor it.

Re: The Right to Sex: Feminism in the Twenty-First Century

#60

Post by vacuity »

smitty1e wrote: post #55
fullshark wrote: post #9

Some day an honest conversation about how in our current internet landscape boys learn about sex through consuming hardcore pornography before they even kiss someone and whether that's something we want as a society needs to happen.

Until we re-prioritize the f-word--family--the rest of the discussion is tangential.

What is the issue and what needs to be done?
Post reply on HN