Then the framing as "progressive language" and "paternalistic". And then the argument that a "breathtaking range of disappointing male behavior gets swept under the umbrella of MeToo". This is quickly followed by the "certain progressive spaces" bogeyman, which is followed by the familiar "men, dehumanized by a framework that casts their desires as inherently predatory".
It was a lot. We usually see one or two.
The difficulty for me is how can I distinguish between a dog whistle and a statement of authentic opinion. Unless one spends time in constant engagement with this type of rhetoric?
Then it sounds to me there's not going to be enough room for people to really get really close authentically, which is the point of intimacy and relationships.
> Even happy relationships involve moments of discomfort, disappointment, conflict—and even amicable breakups are rarely pain-free. Yet young people are now being taught to expect absolute emotional safety in sex, love and courtship at all times
Doesn't that seem a bit like we're sort of being prepared as a market for perfect AI and virtual reality partners that can be sold to us in future because you know ordinary people are too threatening so we may as well embrace expensive and upgradable perfectly safe AI relationships?
I think this phenomena is a symptom of a larger sort of social malaise where people are becoming less willing to take personal responsibility for their own emotions which I think is a key boundary within relationships.
Just because I feel joy or sadness, doesn't mean someone else did something good or bad. Of course it can overlap and it's important to recognize when you can alternately appreciate or give feedback, and stand up to, people for their behavior which works or doesn't work, but what I think is happening is somehow the zeitgeist discourse is normalizing externalizing, projecting, displacing ... in other words blaming other people for however you're feeling.
Of course this is being misused to try to get power over people by accusing them of doing something wrong just because of an emotion you have... or in some cases even don't have, but you can make it their fault anyway. But I think the consequences are deeper and worse than that... "Infantilizing", as the article says, telling people that they are victims under the guise of empowering them, making us all less capable of dealing with our own internal states and emotions without trying to find someone to blame or displace onto... I mean to me it's a sociological and psychological crisis in the making and I don't really understand how we got here....
But I know that in order to get out of the negative implications of this it's going to be very hard to overcome the attachment of people who are benefiting from this "open season" on blaming others.
The only kind of theory I have about it, aside from considerations about how these phenomena are being used to manipulate the public in some way, is that sort because of postmodernism psychoanalytic notions of blaming your parents for all the issues you grew up with somehow became less popular as traditional notions of family or authority decayed, but people still needed something to fill the gap in other... In other words something to blame their problems on and we're not allowed to blame the media or the state because those groups require for their own preservation that we don't effectively blame them so the only option is we had to find ways to blame each other and some low-hanging fruit there is to blame each other in personal relationships. It's not extremely clear or fleshed out but that's an idea that I have.
but if this momentum can be directed towards demanding that everybody behave a little bit better and with more integrity in relationships not just in the workplace but across the board then I think that's a super positive development but there's certainly seems to be some negative aspects that I think this article talks about interestingly....;):p xx
I can begin by questioning the idea that a "ruined woman" still exists in our society. I married twice and never expected a virgin in either case. I married intelligent and interesting women and I'm much better and richer for that. I wasn't a virgin either, so it'd be unfair to demand that anyway.
Between marriages I noticed the vast power I could have over younger less experienced people. Of course I could manipulate them - I was the experienced and interesting person myself.
And then I realized I was once as naïve as they were and the fact I was a man didn't protect me from being manipulated by others smarter and more experienced than me who got away with what they wanted. Don't get me wrong - I had a lot of fun, but, still, it did hurt and it was wrong to be manipulated.
It's unacceptable to drive a car recklessly without care for pedestrians or other drivers the same way it's unacceptable to have sex recklessly without care for the consequences to others. And, yes, that includes casual sex that's more casual for one of the partners.