squirrels wrote

Consistently debunked psuedoscience. It's like saying that climate change deniers are climatologists, or that a flat earther is a geologist. They use "social science" to give their ideology legitimacy, when it has no basis in the data. Augustin Fuentes, an actual social scientist, gave an excellent rebuttal to a racist like Charles Murray after his lecture at Notre Dame: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVDeBL6FuP0&t=53m23s


squirrels wrote

I have to say that if they really do explore alternate universes with this, then I take back every criticism I've ever made of the show. It would be so intensely brilliant, and that twist ending made me very excited. Alternate universes would make every weird inconsistency make sense. It had to be hard to wade through all of the backlash with all of the changes only to keep thinking "damn it, people. Bear with us. There's a payoff involved here!"

Also, <3 Stamets.


squirrels wrote (edited )

She is an exemplary case of why those who commodify and sell "feminism" aren't allies.

On that note: I have immense personal hatred for Girls, as someone who abused me used it as a justification for hurting me. He used it to say that young women were vapid and deserved abuse, because they could easily get out of abusive relationships but don't. He was a huge fan of the show. It perpetuates stereotypes, racism, and sexism and displays a gross amount of classist themes.


squirrels wrote

Reply to comment by !deleted1759 in by !deleted1759

I personally think that the problem is if it's applied within the state and people call upon the power of the state to enforce consent as a felt sense. I am wary of applying this in the context of the state, as such ambiguous policing of sex has more often than not been used to punish queer or otherwise marginalized people.

Having said that, I will say that this concept helped me heal a few years ago when I first ran across it. It was therapeutic and I think it could be a powerful tool toward dismantling patriarchal notions of sex. And, as you said, it's something to consider in non-legalistic models.


squirrels wrote

Indeed they should be. This will single-handedly be the death blow of graduate education in the United States, which is already on life support. Universities would have to either eliminate graduate tuition (that'll happen when hell freezes over), only admit the independently wealthy, or only admit students from abroad. An insidiously ingenious way of dismantling graduate education.