black_robin (![[info]](http://klab.lv/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small} black_robin) rakstīja,@ 2024-11-15 08:57:00 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
4B Is Magnificently Reactionary
"Firstly, it’s a coherent response if - as seems to be the case for many liberal women - you really believe abortion is about to be banned in totality across the entire USA. This isn’t actually true, as far as I can make out, but let’s say you believe this. In this context, for ordinarily fertile women who don’t want to be pregnant the most prudent response is to exit the normative post-Pill libidinal economy of low-cost, no-strings sex altogether.
It doesn’t really matter how you frame your decision; the bottom line is that in this hypothetical world the safest option of all is abstinence. The predominant reaction so far from the culture-war Right to 4B announcements has been variations on “lmao, look at the state of you, it’s not like they were queueing round the block as it was”. But this strikes me as mistaken, given that (once you look past the culture-war posturing) for conservatives encouraging sexual continence was the whole point. Why not just take the W?
More fundamentally: 4B is irreducibly anti-leftist, because it rests on deliberate disciplining of desire. And the whole raison d’être of the modern Left is the abolition of all constraint, the destruction of all form, and the unchaining of desire. It follows that there can be no willed imposition of order, and especially of sexuality - not even in service to nominally progressive goals - that is not structurally reactionary. Again: why not take the W?
And I’ll add further: for all that 4B includes no marriage or babies in the pledge, as well as no dating or sex, you can colour me less than 100% convinced that women will, in aggregate, follow through on this. On the contrary: in the context of sexuality, the outcome of deliberate self-restraint is less likely to be lifelong childless singledom (though this is, of course, still a possibility for some) than opening space for romance. A rocketing rate of lifelong childless singledom is, after all, increasingly obviously the aggregate outcome of re-ordering sexuality to individual amusement, in the context of tech-enabled sterility. But anyone who assumes abstinence would have the same effect across the board is underestimating physis or - to slightly misquote Khalil Gibran - “life’s longing for itself”."
Labs raksts no Mērijas Heringtones
https://www.maryharrington.co.uk/p/4b-i
"Firstly, it’s a coherent response if - as seems to be the case for many liberal women - you really believe abortion is about to be banned in totality across the entire USA. This isn’t actually true, as far as I can make out, but let’s say you believe this. In this context, for ordinarily fertile women who don’t want to be pregnant the most prudent response is to exit the normative post-Pill libidinal economy of low-cost, no-strings sex altogether.
It doesn’t really matter how you frame your decision; the bottom line is that in this hypothetical world the safest option of all is abstinence. The predominant reaction so far from the culture-war Right to 4B announcements has been variations on “lmao, look at the state of you, it’s not like they were queueing round the block as it was”. But this strikes me as mistaken, given that (once you look past the culture-war posturing) for conservatives encouraging sexual continence was the whole point. Why not just take the W?
More fundamentally: 4B is irreducibly anti-leftist, because it rests on deliberate disciplining of desire. And the whole raison d’être of the modern Left is the abolition of all constraint, the destruction of all form, and the unchaining of desire. It follows that there can be no willed imposition of order, and especially of sexuality - not even in service to nominally progressive goals - that is not structurally reactionary. Again: why not take the W?
And I’ll add further: for all that 4B includes no marriage or babies in the pledge, as well as no dating or sex, you can colour me less than 100% convinced that women will, in aggregate, follow through on this. On the contrary: in the context of sexuality, the outcome of deliberate self-restraint is less likely to be lifelong childless singledom (though this is, of course, still a possibility for some) than opening space for romance. A rocketing rate of lifelong childless singledom is, after all, increasingly obviously the aggregate outcome of re-ordering sexuality to individual amusement, in the context of tech-enabled sterility. But anyone who assumes abstinence would have the same effect across the board is underestimating physis or - to slightly misquote Khalil Gibran - “life’s longing for itself”."
Labs raksts no Mērijas Heringtones
https://www.maryharrington.co.uk/p/4b-i
