It's an essay about the various flaws modern feminist sex positivity culture has for women, and that it's often a good idea to refrain from sex even if one isn't religious. The author is an Only Fans model for context. I thought it did a great job laying out the downsides of ubiquitous sex.(Reposted because I accidentally linked to reddit instead of the original essay earlier).
- 281
- 5
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
It seems like they don’t do this because teenaged girls(which is what they are) aren’t capable of regulating their own emotions well enough to say no to a guy their interested in.
I was admittedly both rather low agreeableness and not particularly hot, and also unlikely to be friends with Ms. Khalidi. But it doesn't take all that much willpower to not invite a man into your dorm room on the first date after getting burned a couple of times?
This is precisely why these debates are grating as @f3zinker says; we suddenly develop a whole new standard for agency in order to turn a problem into a trap.
I'm not sure I understand what you're saying. What trap? What standard for agency? Isn't f3zinker the one asserting without elaboration that women have no agency?
There is no trap - as in "a problem that's unpredictable and becomes worse if one uses their better judgment". There's a problem that's very soluble to the actions of the selective sex.
I took f3zinker's point to be more that, in many cases, we just tell people to do the sensible thing to avoid certain problems. But in this particular case people try to contrive some explanation (and/or blame society/men/patriarchy) for why people can't just do the thing that makes it seem like they've been trapped rather than just misusing (allegedly - revealed preference and all that) their agency.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link