The article is behind a paywall, disable JavaScript to break it
www.nytimes.com
Heres a short summary:
Recent western history has shown that sometimes the extremist ideologies and weirdos see the world more clearly than mainstream. Iraq war and crisis of euro are such examples
The first thing I can think of is Robin Hanson, a george mason economist who said that when society is so concerned about redistributing wealth and power, why is redistribution of sex a ridiculous idea? those with less access to sex suffer the same as low income, and can hope to gain by organizing around this identity, lobbying for demands or even threatening violence. This argument was not well received by mainstream, Hanson was dismissed as a misogynistic weirdo.
Another example would be a recent essay by amia srinivasan, "Does anyone have the right to sex?" Amia expanded the argumen beyond male supremacist groups to include overweight, disabled and minority groups, as well as trannies unable to find partners (jfl). Even tho Amia concluded that noone has the right to sex, the new order they seek to establish would redistribute sex more fairly. Amia was met with same response as Hanson.
Hanson and Amia offer a very good case study of how intellectual eccentrics can surface issues buried by mainstream.
As offensive the idea of sex redistribution might be, it is entirely a result of modern sexual life, and is very similar to a recurring pattern in liberal societies in three ways:
1) Like other forms of deregulation by liberal movements, sexual revolution created new hierarchies, new winners and losers, privileging beautiful and rich.
2) This combined with other economic and technological transformation means both sexes are struggling to relate to one another, opening a huuuge chasm between them, going as far as influencing politics
3) Despite feminist attempts to abolish, our culture's dominant message is still that exploring diversity in sex is the best thing one can experience. This makes being at the losing end more unbearable.
All this encourages the losers to hope for another revolution which will atleast offer some redress. One alternative is to return to older ideas about chastity and monogamy, but this is not the natural response in the western society. Instead, west looks for fixes built on previous revolutions
Its likely that economics and market forces will address their issues, such as sex robots and virtual reality porn. Whether sex bots will deliver fulfillment is yet to be seen, but given the current trends capitalists will be prompted to invest in them.
Opinion | The Redistribution of Sex (Published 2018)
How the logic of commerce and technology might be harnessed to address the unhappiness of “incels.”
Heres a short summary:
Recent western history has shown that sometimes the extremist ideologies and weirdos see the world more clearly than mainstream. Iraq war and crisis of euro are such examples
The first thing I can think of is Robin Hanson, a george mason economist who said that when society is so concerned about redistributing wealth and power, why is redistribution of sex a ridiculous idea? those with less access to sex suffer the same as low income, and can hope to gain by organizing around this identity, lobbying for demands or even threatening violence. This argument was not well received by mainstream, Hanson was dismissed as a misogynistic weirdo.
Another example would be a recent essay by amia srinivasan, "Does anyone have the right to sex?" Amia expanded the argumen beyond male supremacist groups to include overweight, disabled and minority groups, as well as trannies unable to find partners (jfl). Even tho Amia concluded that noone has the right to sex, the new order they seek to establish would redistribute sex more fairly. Amia was met with same response as Hanson.
Hanson and Amia offer a very good case study of how intellectual eccentrics can surface issues buried by mainstream.
As offensive the idea of sex redistribution might be, it is entirely a result of modern sexual life, and is very similar to a recurring pattern in liberal societies in three ways:
1) Like other forms of deregulation by liberal movements, sexual revolution created new hierarchies, new winners and losers, privileging beautiful and rich.
2) This combined with other economic and technological transformation means both sexes are struggling to relate to one another, opening a huuuge chasm between them, going as far as influencing politics
3) Despite feminist attempts to abolish, our culture's dominant message is still that exploring diversity in sex is the best thing one can experience. This makes being at the losing end more unbearable.
All this encourages the losers to hope for another revolution which will atleast offer some redress. One alternative is to return to older ideas about chastity and monogamy, but this is not the natural response in the western society. Instead, west looks for fixes built on previous revolutions
Its likely that economics and market forces will address their issues, such as sex robots and virtual reality porn. Whether sex bots will deliver fulfillment is yet to be seen, but given the current trends capitalists will be prompted to invest in them.
