= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
advancedatheist comments on Wikipedia articles from the future - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (86)
I wonder how many more generations of allegedly unfuckable boys our feminist society casts out before we start to see some serious pushback against women's sexual freedom. Polymarriage can only accelerate this process because the natural alpha males, and the ones who can pass themselves off as alphas with game and pickup coaching, will monopolize most of the women in this social trend.
One-man-many-woman marriages are a hallmark of societies that limit women's sexual freedom. Polyamory as practiced in more sexually-liberated and secular contexts is much more balanced.
In other words, you have it entirely backwards.
Do we have statistics that back this up? I'm cautious about the normalization of polyamory because it seems potentially easy for it to collapse down to patriarchal polygamy.
Is The Handmaid's Tale seriously a desirable world for you?
Have you tried reading history so you're not constantly generalizing from fictional evidence?
Have you tried not making broad assumptions about people's factual knowledge because they disagree with you?
I could have asked about the desirability of any other society with horrible oppression against women, like the Taliban regime, Saudi Arabia, Imperial China, or the U.S. in the 1950s, and the question would still be relevant: Would you enjoy living in a society where gender is a basis for differences of power?
Really, that's your idea of "horrible oppression against women"? Yes, the 1950s were in many ways better then today, technology based on atoms was still progressing for one thing, and the system was a lot less dysfunctional in all kinds of ways.
Sure, I suppose today's particle accelerators count for nothing. But technological progress is a matter that may merit its own discussion in another thread. It's the situation of women we're discussing here.
And yes, the 1950s were terrible. A society before the pill meets every definition of "it sucks to be a woman." Moreover, a society before legal abortion, before the recognition of marital rape, before massive access of women to universities and positions of power, before equal pay, before no-fault divorce, before sexual harassment was identified as such, and before widespread coeducation, is a society that oppresses women. Heck, I'm a man, and I'd have hated to live under those conditions.
Pushback against women's sexual freedom would be a tragedy. How can the likelihood of such a trend be reduced? (Profoundly disagree with the whole 'alphas monopolizing women' PUA thing, but still.)