[RD] Toronto van attack

[innonimatu]

Say, do "sex workers" on our wonderful enlightened societies share their bodies because it pleases them, or because they feel they have to?

 

[red_elk]

They (in their mind) deserve sex, on their own merit ; they are being denied that by people who don't recognize their value.

I think people do deserve sex. They just don't have right to demand it from anybody.

 

[Bootstoots]

two quotes from an article on the possible relation between the degree of civilisation and mood (depression etc)
The first one of Hesiod the normal generation issue of all time as a natural gap that self corrects within every generation.
The second one of Albert Einstein, what I also believe is happening, parallel and structural (!!!), including an approach to it I very much like.

"I see no hope for the future of our people if they are dependent on the frivolous youth of today, for certainly all youth are reckless beyond words"
-Hesiod, 8th century B.C.

"I may indicate briefly what to me constitutes the essence of the crisis in our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society… [His] position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate. All human beings, whatever their position in society, are suffering from this process of deterioration. Unknowingly prisoners of their own egotism, they feel insecure, lonely, and deprived of the naive, simple and unsophisticated enjoyment of life. Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society. The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evil"
-Albert Einstein, 1949

Modern social media can faciliate the grouping of any niche group, but I see the increase of incels and similar more coming from the increase of people uncomfortable with themselves in our society, a small minority of them finding an asocial way to manifest themselves.

From that article two graphs:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3330161/
View attachment 494965 View attachment 494967

I miss in that article BTW the graph showing the correlation between mood and rate of cultural individualism-collectivism. My guess is that this would show clearly that more collective cultures, even including some negative surpressive effects from conformism, are better off.
Anyway the two graphs shown, show for me root causes that are more actionable to deal with.
Figure 2 with the Income Inequality shows that Income Inequality is bad for humanity
Figure 1 shows for me that we are lacking in dealing with all kinds of negative effects of the increased degree of civilisation, whether economical (like Fig. 2) or from other civilisation factors like ultra-processed food, urbanisation, scattering of prime social groups, lowering of social belonging, mono-value culture on economic capabilities of individuals in a competitive context, light pollution, circadian rhythm affections, etc, etc

These incels take the wrong turn, but we as a whole are responsible for not adressing the root causes well enough.

That's the paradox of modernity in a nutshell. Premodern life was much tougher in terms of its material conditions: extremely high child and maternal mortality rates, high rates of death by violence and accidents, high risk of death by malnutrition, high disease rates in premodern agricultural societies, and so on. All of this notwithstanding, life was much closer to what we evolved for. There were high amounts of social activity, necessary exercise, exposure to sunlight and nature, etc.

Also, I believe very importantly, life was self-evidently meaningful - it was impossible not to believe in the religious and spiritual views of your society, and everyone felt that there was a self-evident order and purpose to everything. Now, unless you can suspend disbelief and follow a religious/spiritual tradition, or unless you're one of those lucky people who doesn't need to find/create any meaning beyond what exists in the world of materialism, it's really easy to get stuck in an existential void with no escape except for whatever tickles your pleasure centers enough to numb you to it - drugs, food, sex, shopping, money, or the biggest recent distraction - glowing screens attached to electronic devices.

It used to be that stuff was rare and meaning was abundant. Now meaning is rare and stuff is abundant. Humans - or at least a lot of them, including me - don't seem to function very well in a meaningless world. Not that I'd happily turn back the clock and till a meager plot of land with a couple of donkeys, while praying for an abundant harvest rather than the drought that killed half of my family three years ago, mind you.

Virtually all of these random killing events are perpetrated by angry, lost young men seeking revenge against the world for their suffering. In many cases the perpetrator is motivated by an ideology, ranging from Islamism to incel-ism, but those seem to just provide a way for them to focus and justify their anger. This sort of thing is going to keep on happening until we figure out some way to deal with the psychological costs of modernity.

 

[Evie]

Well, yes, Lemon Merchant. I didn't think I needed to specify that part. I don't owe them anything, obviously (and neither do you). Not that they'd care for sex with me since I'm a "trap" and therefore having sex with me would undermine, rather than affirm, their masculinity (in their twisted views).

 

[inthesomeday]

The direction of political action in general is towards decentralization, which has pretty much been the tendency of humanity since like agriculture. Being like “but where’s the leader” doesn’t work anymore. Actual activism today exists in a relationship between people and idea: antifa, BLM, and sadly, incelism.

 

[Lemon Merchant]

Say, do "sex workers" on our wonderful enlightened societies share their bodies because it pleases them, or because they feel they have to?

Having spoken to many in the course of my work, I can tell you that most of them don't do it for the enjoyment. If anything, they hate it.

 

[innonimatu]

It is not due to technical modernity. It's the political "modernity", the organization, that is causing this.

One interesting observation I picked from reading histories is that we've been here before. Humanity has been in the same kind of situation. What prompted the creation of the philosophical schools of cynicism, epicurism, stoicism? A search for meaning, or even only consolation, when the old social organization was being overthrown by the new world empire of the time. When power was being centralized, or at least moved further away from the common citizen. What promoted the reformation and the religious wars in the 16th century might have been the same process: the social effects of the commercial "globalization", the expansion of markets, at the time and how it rearranged life in Europe.

It's not people who adapt, who change their psychology, it seems to me at least that human psychology has been remarkably stable for as long as we have written history. it's the societies that mush be fixed after the periods of disruption, somehow, by changing or creating institutions.

 

[Lexicus]

Say, do "sex workers" on our wonderful enlightened societies share their bodies because it pleases them, or because they feel they have to?

Do I sit in an office all day hunched over a computer because it pleases me, or because I feel I have to? What is the difference between the two except Victorian nonsense about sex?

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Nah, they're a really small number of people. They basically want to create The Handmaid's Tale, literally.

Do they seriously think they'd be the ones who get the handmaids? Only the elite Commanders qualify for one, and as far as we know at this point, that's only if the Commander's Wife can't get pregnant (it's automatically her fault, even if the Commander himself has the problem, ie. if he's sterile).

Also consider that Gilead was founded on some whacked-out version of "Christianity" that thinks it's perfectly normal to quote bible verses prior to ritually raping a woman, or to preach about "God's love" during a session of torture (mock-hanging a group of Handmaids as punishment for their having refused to stone another Handmaid who was by that time mentally ill and tried to kill herself by jumping off a bridge). Are these incel individuals particularly religious?

Other than you, Evie, I seem to be the other woman in this thread. As a woman, I can say unequivocally that I don't owe anyone anything sexually. My body is my own and I will share it with whom I please. It's my right.

Don't assume that some of us aren't reading the thread, as well.

Otherwise, agreed.

Also, I believe very importantly, life was self-evidently meaningful - it was impossible not to believe in the religious and spiritual views of your society, and everyone felt that there was a self-evident order and purpose to everything.

Atheism didn't just pop up in modern times. And in societies with multiple competing religions, which one are you suggesting was impossible not to believe in?

 

[sophie]

Do they seriously think they'd be the ones who get the handmaids? Only the elite Commanders qualify for one, and as far as we know at this point, that's only if the Commander's Wife can't get pregnant (it's automatically her fault, even if the Commander himself has the problem, ie. if he's sterile).

They believe quite literally that they are among the greatest, most brilliant people on the planet for whom it takes a globalist conspiracy from half the world's population to deny them what they think that entitles them to. Yes. They seriously believe they'd be the ones getting the handmaids.

Think about it this way. Remember (or else think to assorted pieces of popular media) when nerdy kids would get bullied in high school, and adults would try to cheer them up by reminding them that "10 years from now you'll be a rich engineer and you'll be paying [the bully] to wash your car". These are those kids 10 years later. Only they aren't rich. They aren't engineers. And they're the ones doing the car washing. And to their minds, its not due to any sort of moral failing or bad luck. It's a conspiracy on the part of women and alpha males to keep them down.

 

[Kyriakos]

Dangerous for sex workers and doesn't solve the problem. I keep seeing this recommendation crop up and it is disgusting each and every single time.

"Hey, you know what would solve this issue? Forcing sex workers to deal with it to keep it away from common society."

The problem is the individual adhering to Incel philosophy, not the women. Christ.

I have to suppose that sex workers routinely deal with such - and worse. Afterall, people usually don't go to a brothel for recreational purposes, but because it is an easy exchange of a set amount of money for sex. And the sex workers do this work for the same thing (only the other way around).

 

[Synobun]

With modernization and a gradual shift towards treating sex workers as human beings, they're gaining more and more control over who has access to their services. Outside of establishments where the sex worker is essentially owned (as stereotyped with brothels and the illegal sex trade), it's likely that a loyal adherent to the Incels philosophy would not make the cut.

When Trump's administration (although it had bipartisan support) forced Backpage and other personal ad sections to shut down, it also removed one of the only ways available to a sex worker to vet their prospective clients. If you force sex workers to work on the street or be 'represented' by another, then you are absolutely right that they'll routinely deal with such - and worse.

We exist in a society where that doesn't need to be the case, however, and I generally don't like the idea that sex workers should in any way be responsible for the outcomes of men who have adopted a philosophy that signifies women as the enemy.

 

[Kyriakos]

^Ok, yet i think that the whole point of having sex workers, as you put it, is to make sex available to those who have difficulty getting it in other ways. So if there is freedom (beyond some obvious level, eg for safety) to choose if the sex worker will have sex with a client, that is taken away. Afaik there are levels, ie there are the legal ones (lower end being brothels, higher end being hotel/private visits) and the non-regulated (and certainly more dangerous both for client and worker) street ones.
Personally i think it is impossible to make this line of work actually respectable, or that much humane. Though it is certain that the higher end sex workers cost a level of magnitude more, and thus already keep the peasant incel away ^^

 

[Synobun]

Misogynistic implications of sex workers not being respectable aside, your perspective on the "point" of having sex workers is flawed. The industry, and its providers, don't exist to gift the luxuries of sexual satisfaction to those who can't get it otherwise. It is a paid personal service, and the "personal" part of that equation inherently comes with the right to choose. Becoming a sex worker is not akin to transforming one's reproductive organs into a revolving door for an open house.

 

[Kyriakos]

Misogynistic implications of sex workers not being respectable aside, your perspective on the "point" of having sex workers is flawed. The industry, and its providers, don't exist to gift the luxuries of sexual satisfaction to those who can't get it otherwise. It is a paid personal service, and the "personal" part of that equation inherently comes with the right to choose. Becoming a sex worker is not akin to transforming one's reproductive organs into a revolving door for an open house.

Hm, i think i will opt to be polite, and politely tell you that it'd be a good idea to not speak of stuff you know nothing about. Or if you absolutely have to, at least be aware to the degree that makes you not try to speak against the other person. TLDR: this isn't what was said to you, and your view on sex workers is not tied to reality, apart from any platitudes inserted here and there. Basically it is as if the client of your post was your own self, and the work provided was dodgy from start to finish

 

[Synobun]

You say: Personally i think it is impossible to make this line of work actually respectable

I say: Misogynistic implications of sex workers not being respectable aside

You say: TLDR: this isn't what was said to you



Anyways, have you ever spoken to a sex worker, and shared your views about them and their work with them?

 

[Kyriakos]

M8, i think we should better move on. Don't worry, i don't look down on sex workers, that wasn't what was said.

 

[Synobun]

You don't look down on them, you only think they aren't respectable.

 

[red_elk]

It is a paid personal service, and the "personal" part of that equation inherently comes with the right to choose.

They have essentially the same "right to choose" as hairdresser. I don't think their right to choose should make a hypothetical incel getting sex any more difficult than getting a haircut.

 

[Synobun]

They have basically the same "right to choose" as hairdresser. I don't think their right to choose should make a hypothetical incel getting sex any more difficult than getting a haircut.

Hairdressers can absolutely refuse service to people who pose a risk or do not meet basic hygiene standards.