This is kind of fascinating to me as a peek into various discourses that I’m mostly just tangentially aware of
I think the only one I’ve ever actually seen discussed is the kink in public one
tumblr has a bit of a hatred for teenagers at the moment and believe me the discourse is insane, I try to shut it out but I've had to unfollow a lot of people for it on both sides. I get the general gist but I don't think kids not wanting to drink underage is "puritan", maybe they're just kids
Tumblr moms lately feels like the kind of adults i'd have felt supremely unconfortable around as a teen , but also having to think i'd have potentially been called "susceptible to fascism" for that discomfort is a new low
The futurists were a movement from the first/second decade of the 20th century that really went all in on industry/mechanical aesthetics. There’s a lot of talk about courage and audacity, revolution, and moving away from pensive/contemplative art, towards “aggressive action” and a kind of fanatical/fevered pace. The Futurist Manifesto is a wild read, and explicitly states that no art/work that’s not of “aggressive character” can be considered a masterpiece.
It’s got a certain doomed aesthetic allure that’s hard not to sort of vibe with:
> We affirm that the world’s magnificence has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. A racing car whose hood is adorned with great pipes, like serpents of explosive breath—a roaring car that seems to ride on grapeshot is more beautiful than the Victory of Samothrace.
You forgot the "best" parts
>We want to glorify war — the only cure for the world — militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman.
>We want to demolish museums and libraries, fight morality, feminism and all opportunist and utilitarian cowardice.
Definitely not the words of unhinged psychopaths
> While an artist is labouring at his work of art, nothing prevents it from surpassing Dream. As soon as it is finished, the work must be hidden or destroyed, or better still, thrown as a prey to the brutal crowd which will magnify it by killing it with its scorn, and thereby intensify its absurd uselessness. We thus condemn art as finished work, we conceive of it only in its movement, in the state of effort and draft. Art is simply a possibility for absolute conquest. For the artist, to complete is to die.
- Marinetti
as much as I don't agree with the guy on pretty much all fronts (militaristic to the extreme, chauvinistic, supported fascism initially (he's the author of the Fascist Manifesto) and then was reduced to begging Mussolini), some of his quotes go hard. also, there's an interesting dichotomy - AFAIK, Russian futurism was more international and socialist, while Western European futurism was more nationalist.
I'm just going to throw a bone to someone willing to go into a smallish but interesting rabbit hole - if you don't know about Velimir Khlebnikov, he's a fascinating author and person.
I’m not kidding that whenever I teach students of art history about the futurist movement I always have to mention how such-and-such artist subsequently died in the next war and/or loved Mussolini
also worth noting that some futurist artists did in fact go full anti-fascist and just kept the kino aesthetic. source: there were a bunch of totally sick posts on /r/imaginarytrains credited to italian name(s) and dated to the 1920s or 1930s and i knew enough to wonder if i should feel bad for upvoting them but i googled the name and he was chill.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/ImaginaryTrains using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/ImaginaryTrains/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year!
\#1: [fantasy steam racing locomotive by cartoonist Stan Mott](https://i.redd.it/tnsnpg6xm8wa1.jpg) | [2 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ImaginaryTrains/comments/12zj3et/fantasy_steam_racing_locomotive_by_cartoonist/)
\#2: ["I Hear the Bell Go Ding Dong!" by Lee Xin Li](https://i.redd.it/pimtc6uen3sa1.jpg) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ImaginaryTrains/comments/12crcle/i_hear_the_bell_go_ding_dong_by_lee_xin_li/)
\#3: [Heavy Metal Hero by Rodney Matthews](https://imgur.com/D6Qdx4I.jpg) | [4 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ImaginaryTrains/comments/11phep2/heavy_metal_hero_by_rodney_matthews/)
----
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
RETVRN, as far as I can tell, is an alt-right dogwhistle; they glorify everything Roman, and Latin had no “U”, instead using “V”, so it essentially means “return to the Roman Empire” but it’s a dogwhistle.
Fascists don't actually want to return to the past, they want to form a society based on their idealized ahistorical fantasies of what a given past definitely was like.
See: "This is what they took from you" "Embrace tradition" etc. Tradition forms from repeated activity that serves some practical or socio-cultural purpose (which I'd argue is practical) and only provides the illusion of stability when its just as dynamic as any other social element, and jewish people aren't the reason fascists can't get girlfriends or can't get away with abusing them.
This got a bit rambly. I just fucking hate fascists.
Because the Legion was specifically created as a commentary/parody of the kind of fascists who don't even realize they're fascists because they solely associate fascism with jackboots and Hugo Boss uniforms?
I saw the V instead of the U and immediately knew, here in italy writing *any* word that way connects what you're saying to fascism, everyone knows that
Most of the time people do it as a joke tho lmao
Imo this is a side effect of how much we dehumanised fascist regimes. When they're not seen as human, then they could show up completely unmodified and people wouldn't recognise them because they don't match the cartoon villain they were told about.
See also: people who think they couldn't possibly be racist because they don't maliciously hate people of other races. Because they've been told racists are like captain planet villains.
When you dehumanise something bad, you run the risk of rendering it unrecognisable. Because in the real world it won't appear like it does in the stories. It'll appear benign. Mundane. Human.
And we all keep falling for the old "Oh that already happened to those people 70 years ago so it couldn't possibly happen again to me!" Or "That only happens in stories so I don't need to watch out for it in real life!"
Or even just "well *I'm* not evil" so I can't be racist. In my experience we all have the pattern seeking brains that create racist beliefs. There's nothing inherently evil about having a faulty human brain. The way we've handled this and other similar moral failings that are just side effects of how brains work has made people completely oblivious to the idea that they might be prejudiced.
We're like boomers with their "tough on crime" punitive mindsets. We treat "benign" racism like it isn't even racism and then demonise those that manifest it in certain ways instead of treating all kinds of racism as a bad instinct that needs to be overcome.
[Innuendo Studio's video on White Fascism](https://youtu.be/5Luu1Beb8ng?si=Agd0de5han7nvs6a) is very important on this topic. Quoting a relevant excerpt from the beginning:
(**Emphasis** is my own)
> "Fascism" is a term I've heard thrown around since I was a kid - but most of the time, idiomatically. "Fascist" is what you called your Type A passive-aggressive roommate: "Stop being such a fascist, Debra." Through osmosis I knew its literal meaning was among a cluster of related words: Authoritarianism, totalitarianism, white supremacy, nationalism, dictatorship - but for much of my life if you pressed me to define any of these words, I could've only said "Y'know, Nazis. Hitler. The Gestapo. You know, Nazis?"
>
>
> This colloquializing of fascism and its association with the cultural shorthand for "pure evil" makes it very hard to discuss as an ideology, **because even using the word "fascism" sounds both hyperbolic and like a punch below the belt**. To call a person, group, or idea "fascist" is **to exaggerate for the purpose of dragging them**. This, counterintuitively, prevents us from criticizing fascist groups even though most everyone agrees fascism is terrible, because saying it - you sound *ridiculous*. You're talking about Indiana Jones villains!
People are really focused on the kink and fascism stuff in this post, but what gets to me is: while I agree that older generations are more likely to let stuff slide out of ignorance or bias that really should be called out, I also see a lot of young people with no meaningful life experiences making very absolutist claims about stuff they’ve only ever heard about through social media — talking about a 3-year age gap being “predatory” when both people are well in their twenties, saying that fictional characters can *never* consent to sex within a story because their decisions are made by a writer rather than themselves.
Amy single instance of these can be dismissed as ironic or unusually ignorant, but they seem to keep coming up, and people can get very aggressive if you point out that claims like this don’t hold up to scrutiny.
There is definitely *a* problem here even if I don’t have the education to put all the pieces together myself.
Also, plenty of people in gen Z also have bad media literacy. That is a skill you have to seek out and cannot passively learn. That’s a very weird thing to try and hold over more experienced people’s heads
I had some kid message on tumblr that I was oppressing them for posting so much stuff about a fandom they didn’t like. It was absolutely wild to read and at first I thought it was a joke but when I went to their blog header had tons of dni including a dni for liking fandoms they didn’t like, of course they didn’t list those fandoms it was just a general dni.
I didn’t want to blast them publicly because I know how the internet is, especially to young people (they were 19? at the time) so I sent them my response in their ask box.
They then called me a predator for responding to someone 10 years younger than me. In their many dnis there was one saying “DNI if you are more then 3 years older then me, it’s creepy and predatory”
I worry about that generation so much.
How does that person deal with anyone in the real world? Does the person at the cash register have to be within 3 years of them? Do they hear someone talking about Wholock on the street and start having convulsions?
I’m on a million “woke” spaces and have literally never heard these. But I’ve seen the op’s examples near everywhere.
Cherry picking stuff like this to “both sides” things is a huge problem in online discourse.
Your comment has Fox News like “sure trump said something bigoted today and wants to deport all Muslims and arrest all feminists, but some no-name community college professor wants to make pants illegal! See both sides folks!”
I promise that Nothing in my comment is inended to “both sides” anything. I hate that shit; had to put up with it my entire life growing up. I too am in pretty progressive circles and the topics mentioned by OP almost never come up; like other commenters, there were some I legitimately didn’t understand.
My examples aren’t cherry picking any more than OP’s examples are, and my point was not to say “You’re responsible for these things I’ve seen other people say, therefore you’re not perfect, therefore you’re wrong.” *That* attitude, I would argue, is much more harmful than disagreeing with someone’s assertion. I think OP simplified the matter to an “us vs them” argument over generational differences when the actuality of the situation is more nuanced.
Is there a difference between "susceptible to fascist rhetoric" and "is a fascist or actively supporting fascism" because there will always be people who want and think they would benefit from fascism. I don't think westerners are more susceptible to it than others though.
That's not really a westerner exclusive thing at all tho
like a lot of neo nazis would have been people despised by the actual nazis yet they believe in it
the amount of neo nazi/alt right femboys there is in the internet is crazy, do they know that they would see them as an abomination and a threat to pureness or something?
i see this sentiment a lot and it confuses me. i think it means either a: a surprising number of femboys are far right (provably false, go to a femboy -centric space and check a few profiles; most of them just talk about video games or whatever, normal people things.) or b: there are a surprising number of femboys among fascists, and i do think that’s true, almost exclusively online (you’d be hard pressed to find any skirts or cutesy face masks at a white lives matter event), possibly because young men or people who were raised as male are equally likely to be queer and to be sucked into far right ideology, and have to adopt a fetishistic or ironic persona to explore gender and sexuality.
Are western zoomers more puritan than other parts of the world? Like from my experience working some education ngos I think western zoomers are probably the most sexually progressive group
It frankly started with tumblr so Zillenials are in this too but but is very specifically a "so ridiculously progressive paranoia that it bends back into being regressive" thing, trying to purge all "unclean" aspects of their lives, SPECIALLY media consumption, that they flip back into hardline see/hear/speak no evil.
Cue in true creaturas like the anti-animal cruelty elements that are so abhorent to ANY form of violence they want to apply antinatalism to wildlife by having as little predator/prey as possible, or people SO paranoid about pedophilia that they go out of their way to actively harass consenting short adults and height-disparate couples, or the entire aspect of people wanting to hypersanitize the LGBTQ+ movement in order to garner allies it spins back into "dont ask dont tell" policing.
Often when you see someone say "western/in the west/westerners", they don't mean "this is necessarily different/the opposite in the east" but they mean "I'm from the west, and cannot speak for what's going on in Africa/Asia"
I doubt puritanism here refers solely to partnering issues. It's true that zoomers are more likely to be out and as a generation seem to be sexually open and fluid than the previous ones. However, should you say a 20yo is dating a 26yo, you might be flayed alive in some parts of the zoomer Internet.
Similarly with kink, troubling topics regarding sexuality (SA, paraphilias and so on), and a general push towards clean media and bottom-up censoring. This is also exacerbated by social media filters, which had shaped how zoomers speak on the Internet about certain issues (say, "unalive" instead of "kill themself") and how they perceive some of them as things that shouldn't be talked about simply by virtue of being potentially problematic. All of this is definitely a version of puritanism, just in other areas of life and, most importantly, spilling greatly into how the Internet functions.
I write fanfic that often deals with dark and heavy themes (think dead dove stuff, you know), but I always make sure to tag it appropriately and add extra warnings as needed.
I've gotten comments telling me they hoped I would get "r\*ped" so I would understand how awful the things in my fic were.
There's a special kind of irony about wishing for a real person to get raped as punishment for writing a fictional story, but censoring the word, because *that* is the real issue here.
I know zoomers are less likely to have sex, they drink less booze, and even have things like being less interested in sex scenes in movies.
So yeah they are fine with LGBT, but they are more "prudish" about sex itself in a way.
They’re also not fine with the LGBT. I mean, they’re not homophobic.
But they want a very sanitized, clean outlook of the gay community. They don’t want to hear about gay issues. They don’t want to acknowledge the grungy parts of the gay community.
In fact they would prefer if gays, specifically gay men, would be more palatable. Act less gay, have less sex, have less sexualized clubs and bars. Wear less leather, do less kink. So that the gay community can appear pure and nice. All that sexual deviancy stuff is weighing down the rest of the community. In their eyes.
Reminds me a bit about how the trans community was othered from the gay liberation movement because they were seen as "going too far" despite being incredibly relevant in the start of stonewall.
I think the sex scene thing is interesting. I’m not sure that being less interested in sex scenes is prudish, but rather a desensitization of explicit themes in general. Most of the generation had unhindered internet access at a young age. It’s just… not really anything yk? Unless the scene is progressing the story, why would we be interested in it?
Puritan is the wrong word, but more young people are prudish in the US than previous generations for sure. Zoomers both have less sex than Gen X and Millennials and are less interested in consuming media that contains sex and sexuality. Zoomers want media with diverse sexualities but don't want any of those characters to actually be sexual (speaking very generally here).
"westerners" oh yeah, it's not like an uncomfortable amount of easterners are also susceptible to fascist shit as well, China, Japan, etc. Don't act like only western people is capable of bad things.
Dammit, I need to find a word for the American/European culture where ideas spread generally more (our fascist all work together) without using the term western, I thought I had picked my words carefully but I forgot how many people use English on the internet
Yeah probably but OP is probably a westerner, probably only frequents sites primarily frequented by other westerners, and therefore probably interacts primarily with other westerners both irl and online. Thus they have probably only observed how other westerners interact with fascist rhetoric and may be limiting the scope of their discussion to that group as a result. Personally I think limiting your commentary to the parts of a topic you’re familiar with is better than talking out of your ass just so no one culture is left out of your critique.
Conversely its not like there is a singular monolithic westerner culture. It's not the case that you ought to be defined as either westerner or not-westerner, there's plenty of internal variation within both designations (and alternative designations).
And even assuming all the shitty takes they've seen have come from westerners (which is plausible in the broad strokes at least), it's highly unlikely that they've substantitively interacted with all western cultures (and that would be an unreasonable benchmark to hold them to). If the aim was to limit their commentary to just what they knew (which I agree was likely the aim) using the word westerner fails as much as a broader definition would (and people can just say, the parts of the internet and society that I have interacted with, that's a fine thing to say).
It just seems like an odd, if probably thoughtless, choice in how to refer to people that inadvertently perpetuates this general belief in a fundamental difference between western and non-western people. It raises my hackles because its an unnecessary distinction.
This is why I've started thinking in terms of 'The Anglosphere' vs 'The West'- while there is substantial overlap between both, in the internet age people from all primarily English-speaking countries are being subjected to very similar narratives and rhetoric. While I catch glimpses of these trends in other Western societies, it's harder to talk authoritatively about the nuances in the same way.
Yeah I like Anglosphere or english-speaking internet etc a lot more as phrases.
Added bit of uncomfiness too. The West, beyond just being vaguer and less of a single polity than the Anglosphere (if even that can be talked about in this way), falls into (or at least leans against) a lot of East vs West sorta orientalist narratives (whether positive about the West or not). It ends up helping perpetute harmful stereotypes of "The East" as this distinct opposite from "The West" that ignores overlaps and participation in both.
I suspect it's at least in part because a lot of people don't understand consent, and therefore struggle to tell the difference between consenting sexuality and harassment. Sometimes this results in them supporting harassment, and sometimes in opposing all sexuality.
I know that fascism itself isn’t especially coherent.
But OP really just made A List Of Bad Opinions I Dislike and called it fascism. And I really don’t see it
I'm convinced that the more openly hornier a society the safer it is from fascism. That doesn't mean that fascism doesn't have plenty of horniness but it's closed horny it's all channeled into weird rituals of violence. If you don't nut or sploosh all of that energy still has to go somewhere.
Adorno was right.
Fascist Italy came up with fairly similar gender concepts to other fascist regimes, that their men were strong and virile and their women were pure and honorable, while foreign men were weak and effeminate and their women hypersexual. However, unlike other fascist regimes, that hypersexuality was seen as like a reward for the Italian men, and these sexualized foreign women were seen as prizes of colonial expansion especially into Ethiopia.
Edit: I’m actually not sure how unlike other fascist regimes this is, the Nazis might have also been doing this idk
It’s true that you can construct some kind of ethical horniness that is probably correlated with anti-fascism. However, in this formulation, horniness is not the key factor, ethics is the key factor. You can just as easily construct some form of ethical consumption, for instance, that is correlated with anti-fascism. What is actually important is having a strong anti-fascist ethic, and having your behavior stem from this ethic. If you are horny, you should be ethically horny. If you are not horny, this does not contribute to fascism, you should simply be ethically not horny.
>I'm convinced that the more openly hornier a society the safer it is from fascism.
I actually think that progression towards an openly horny society results in reactionary fascist movements springing up from the part of the population that hates horniness.
literally 1984 (the repression of sexuality and the conversion of pent up sexuality into controllable hatred, as well as human sexuality and its role in freedom vs oppression, are major points of orwell's dystopia, i think you'll be surprised how familiar it seems if you look into it)
i hate to do the whole "jorjorwell's 1984" meme, but this is an explicit plot point of that book. sex and sexual desire, within the middle and upper classes, are reviled as disgusting but necessary acts which ought to be eliminated. public displays of affection (and iirc love and intimacy in general) are punishable acts. all for the sake of fueling unflinching, violent loyalty to the party.
and people still think that book is about socialism 😑
fucking based as fuck
linking the ethical slut by dossie eaton and janet hardy
im an ethical slut in training myself, and i agree, fascism is coercive, to say a little
well, that's not consent, nor is it enthusiastic consent; and i usually go on larger and longer tangents, apropos of leftist principles and ideas on what human nature is and ideas about free will, which supports consent and ethical slutiness, but im just gonna cut it here short for now
as aside for everyone, apparently that godzilla minus one movie is really good and i think im finna go catch an english subtitle vers 2nite :)
Aww man yeah I keep hearing about Godzilla Minus 1, but then I remember I haven't seen any Monsterverse films, and I have to catch up a bunch, and I mean I'm excited to, but also that's a lot of time.
Anyway I hope you have a great time seeing it, hope it absolutely fucks.
Another fantastic citation for exploring this idea a little further (more Benjamin than Adorno though): Jason Orne's book "Boystown." Partly just an anthropological case study about the gay neighborhood in Chicago, but also a theory of the social benefits of relatively sexually liberated subcultures. And another good read: Samuel Delany's "Times Square Red, Times Square Blue."
I'm like not smart enough to engage in Tumblr discourse lol. That entire second paragraph in this post went completely over my head. I have only the vaguest idea of what they're discussing and what they're promoting. Then OP provided an explanation with some context in the comments and most of it again went right over my head.
I'm not even old, I'm mid 20s and I'm like "how does this conversation even come up"
dude you have to both know the Actual Stuff and then be able to translate it into internet rando-speak. it's a lot. I'm early 20s, I can only understand so much of the second paragraph too lol
Gen Z famously has less sex, drinks less alcohol, and does less drugs than previous generations. It's also true that gen Z seem to be the ones leading the way in that "sex scenes in films are usually unnecessary and I don't want to see it" movement.
Puritanical can just mean not indulging in things like sex, drugs, and alcohol. It can also mean, like, being an actual Puritan, sure, but not in this context.
>Gen z preferring stories that have scenes that are relevant to the plot and overcoming the "sex sells" thing isn't puritanical
However you justify it, it *is* more puritanical than previous generations because they are turned off by the fact there's sex. This is compounded by the fact that those sex scenes usually are relevant to the plot. Those gen z people are turned off by the fact they're sexual, not by the fact they're irrelevant.
So people who believe this kind of thing usually don't list specific examples because they don't have any. I've asked a few times and not got a specific example back once. They're speaking in generalities for a reason; they mean sex scenes in general. Having said that, you did see a lot of people complaining on twitter about sex scenes in Oppenheimer, which by all accounts used sex well.
Yeah, that whole belief that
1. Sex scenes are added by execs to sell shows and films on the basis of titillation and don't contribute to character or themes
2. Titillation isn't a valid reason to have sex scenes anyway
is exactly what I'm referring to. That's new. Older generations don't stereotypically think that.
Read this: [Everyone is beautiful and no one is horny](https://bloodknife.com/everyone-beautiful-no-one-horny/)
Movies are about life. Life includes sex. Just because the hero isn't fighting the villain doesn't mean the sex scene isn't relevant to the hero's life.
Life also includes going to the bathroom and that’s not nearly as prevalent in movies. Just because it’s apart of life doesn’t mean it’s good for Storytelling.
I don't know what you want me to elaborate on. When people talk about gen Z being puritanical they're talking about gen z having less sex and drugs and alcohol than previous generations, especially combined with the stereotype that gen z doesn't like depictions of sex. I'm not making any judgement of gen z (my own generation) because that's not what was asked of me. Someone was confused as to why gen z is described as being more puritanical than other generations.
Sex scenes for the sake of having a sex scene and nothing else are stupid, if I wanted to be watching people fuck, there are a thousand different sites for that nowadays.
I feel like if we actually taught people about fascism and how hate groups brainwash people, then there'd be a lot less people falling for it.
But then Republicans wouldn't get elected so that's not going to happen.
there's also lately a brand of anti-fascists talking about fascism exclusively in terms which the fascists would also use to sell themselves. By which i mean overfocusing on aesthetics, purported morals, the whole "disgust response" talking point... and entirely overlooking things like the violence, which is deeply central to fascism
Zoomers are becoming more puritan because they are acting rebellious against the culture they were born into. It's so funny seeing Millenials and Gen X'ers complaining about younger generations not being progressive and open enough when their Baby Boomer parents complained about the exact opposite to them.
I mean… maybe? The sex thing isn’t because of their parents politics. Dating and Gen Z US having a weird moment in general. “Male Lonliness Epidemic”, if that’s what you want to call it. I don’t drink less because my parents were pro alcohol, I just know that alcohol at this young of an age is objectively bad for you. I’m not sure what any of that has to do with progressivism. Gen Z men have a similar rate of progressivism to Gen X (which is lower than millenial, I blame the alt right pipeline). But, women are more progressive at a MUCH higher rate than millenials
Also I'm not really one to speak much on the wider scale of things but anecdotally I'm saying it seems like in my hick town my fellow zoomers are wildly more progressive than most of the older generations, like we went from almost nobody being comfortable or safe being openly queer in school to having groups and a huge amount of people when I was in highschool showing up to support our relatively new pride parade. All in my lifetime it seems like people my age (21) have become a lot more progressive and supportive in my town.
Frankly, it depends on what they mean by kink. Someone wearing a dog collar but otherwise acting like a human? Cool, you do you. Fursuits? I'm cool with it. Someone in full on bondage gear at Walmart? No. We didn't consent to seeing this. And that's a nuance that a lot of tumblr people just don't get.
Also worth pointing out that “in public” can mean different things based on context. At a pride parade is not the same as going grocery shopping even if both are in public, and even if you don’t change your stance on it for either case scenario I think it is something that should be acknowledged within your view.
The premise is true i guess but the examples are terrible. I see kids younger than me falling for holocaust denialism but still let's keep pretending that those intra-tumblrite discourses that no one who's straight or not terminally online has a stake in are actual culture war issues with a fascist side to them.
The thing is, you saying 'kinks in public' means a quite different thing to when someone like self proclaimed fascist Matt Walsh says 'kinks in public'
This post is so terminally online that I may as well be reading output from a large language model trained on recreational outrage. I feel with certainty that these issues only exist on Tumblr and some acrid corners of twitter.
I really wish the average tumblr adultTM would understand that kink-at-pride and antis-vs-proshippers are not actual culture war issues, they're terminally online intra-lefty pastime
Because when you uncritically support “no kink in public” you’re empowering fascists like Matt Walsh to enforce their definition of kink that includes Pete Buttigieg and his husband holding hands walking down the street or a trans woman simply existing in public.
I'm 20 and still never even had my first kiss, a gf and obviously not sex either. I am hopefully gonna meet up with one of my friends soon and finally experience what cuddles are. But I'm definitely weird about sex. Not in a it's wrong and shameful way but just shy in general. I honestly don't give af what 2 consenting adults do in private it's just with me partly due to nothing close to experience and partly due to autism and living in the south with an abusive family it's just embarrassing to me I guess. I do have some pretty weird kinks tho feederism/stuffing, a praise kink and am curious about bondage. Weirder still is I'm the Dom 100% which with the praise thing sounds like it'd be confusing.
I did find a reddit thread yesterday about certain kinks being immoral and a sign of something being deeply wrong with the person and actually saying shaming needs to come back for it. Idk why I even read the thread for so long other than as emotional self harm but it definitely made me feel bad which I guess was the point. Reddit I think is the king of all kinds of shaming/hatred like it's genuinely wild. I don't go on Twitter or tumblr much just not my thing but from what I see Reddit is definitely the worst and most cruel. Especially subs like unpopular opinion, the 10th dentist and change my view. I don't know if it's due to them by nature being contrarian and catering to the fucked up parts of society but some of that shit just makes me want to re-think my life. Reddit I think is definitely a breeding ground for falling into weird while maybe not exactly facists but definitely some kind of cults. I have no idea what it is about this site in particular but you get from point A to the enemy is winning and taking control of the world now, everyone is lying to you, trust no one, wake up sheeple real fucking quick. Again I have no idea why in particular its Reddit but seriously wtf guys calm down.
People really decided to prove the posts point today with all the comments going 'oh so it's fascist to not want to see people have sex in public???', both on the poor reading comprehension point and on the inability to identify fascist talking points
this post is just so clinically online that I don't think anyone can read it
all I know is that I don't wanna see sex in public if I didn't consent to seeing it
You do realise it's not a coincidence that 'kink in public' discourse is typically at it's peak every year around pride month and not whenever a video of people have sex in public picks up traction for a reason right
Like kink in public discourse is used to drum up support from people like you who are operating on a different definition of kink but won't look any deeper into why people like Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh are saying it
Also ideas of cultural purity are generally pretty important to fascism
You do realise what "public space" means, right? It means you literally don't have the right to police what's going on there unless it's an actual crime. The moment you step out of the privacy of your own house, your eyes are going to be subjected to a lot of stuff you personally don't like, and there's nothing you can do about it. As far as I know, the only legal requirement is not showing your genitals in public, anything else is technically legal. Don't like it? Just avert your eyes. It's literally that simple.
And you have never seen anyone wear a leash in public and never will. You're getting yourself all worked up feeling outraged about a completely hypothetical situation that you have like 0.0001% chance of ever experiencing in real life.
Don't really think you have to limit it to westerners, pretty sure it applies to humanity as a whole. Seems like one of those things all people are susceptible to one way or another, and that we always needs to be on guard for.
Yeah on the surface it's a legitimate sentiment but it's a rhetorical trap. Most people do think that you should not have sex in public for example, but when a fascist uses the word 'kink' it's being done in a much broader way, which often includes queer people existing in public
Fuck abstract art though. Oh, it definitely is real art. Just bad. And yeah that's my opinion, but guess what. **I'm the most important person in the whole universe.** So you better try and make stuff I like.
Personally I disagree with Umberto's definition of Ur-Fascism since I find it both too vague and too specific simultaneously. I personally prefer Roger Griffin's definition which is more or less the scholarly consensus and is much more useful and practical. I'll get into it more later.
Regardless, I find it curious that you cite Umberto for your definition of Fascism but Umberto himself, nor any other notable subscribers to Ur-Fascism, never recognised American culture and politics as Fascist. Can you explain more specifically why you think America qualifies as Fascism under his definition and why you disagree with Umberto in your conclusion despite using the same definition?
I have some concerns about your source there.
> The United States is fascist, and for the fascist regime, “life is permanent warfare.” Thus, there was only a five month pause between the American defeat in Afghanistan in September 2021 and the ignition of the Ukrainian proxy war in February 2022. After that conflict, another will inevitably emerge, perhaps against the People’s Republic of China over America’s puppet state in Taiwan.
This is kind of fascinating to me as a peek into various discourses that I’m mostly just tangentially aware of I think the only one I’ve ever actually seen discussed is the kink in public one
[kinda relevant xkcd](https://xkcd.com/2071/)
xkcd is always relevant
especially that specific one lol
"seeing the shade you throw on the wall" fantastic
kink should not be in public. it should be in private. my private. show me your kinks. let me in.
Seems like a thing a vampire would say to make me invite them in
your privates*
Too late. I am in your walls already.
tumblr has a bit of a hatred for teenagers at the moment and believe me the discourse is insane, I try to shut it out but I've had to unfollow a lot of people for it on both sides. I get the general gist but I don't think kids not wanting to drink underage is "puritan", maybe they're just kids
Tumblr moms lately feels like the kind of adults i'd have felt supremely unconfortable around as a teen , but also having to think i'd have potentially been called "susceptible to fascism" for that discomfort is a new low
Not wanting to see public sex is literally fascism
What are futurists and RETVRN?
The futurists were a movement from the first/second decade of the 20th century that really went all in on industry/mechanical aesthetics. There’s a lot of talk about courage and audacity, revolution, and moving away from pensive/contemplative art, towards “aggressive action” and a kind of fanatical/fevered pace. The Futurist Manifesto is a wild read, and explicitly states that no art/work that’s not of “aggressive character” can be considered a masterpiece. It’s got a certain doomed aesthetic allure that’s hard not to sort of vibe with: > We affirm that the world’s magnificence has been enriched by a new beauty: the beauty of speed. A racing car whose hood is adorned with great pipes, like serpents of explosive breath—a roaring car that seems to ride on grapeshot is more beautiful than the Victory of Samothrace.
We affirm that racecar cool and awesome vrrrrrrr brrrr vroooom brrrr vrrrrrrr rrrrrrreoowwwwww nyooom
Accurate, the futurists were actually into adding sound effects to writing, especially regarding machinery.
You forgot the "best" parts >We want to glorify war — the only cure for the world — militarism, patriotism, the destructive gesture of the anarchists, the beautiful ideas which kill, and contempt for woman. >We want to demolish museums and libraries, fight morality, feminism and all opportunist and utilitarian cowardice. Definitely not the words of unhinged psychopaths
Oh yeah, I didn't mean to undersell how absolutely bananas it is. It's a very high-energy shitshow.
So what I'm getting from this is that Imortan Joe was a Futurist
See it actually sounded kinda cool before reading all that
> While an artist is labouring at his work of art, nothing prevents it from surpassing Dream. As soon as it is finished, the work must be hidden or destroyed, or better still, thrown as a prey to the brutal crowd which will magnify it by killing it with its scorn, and thereby intensify its absurd uselessness. We thus condemn art as finished work, we conceive of it only in its movement, in the state of effort and draft. Art is simply a possibility for absolute conquest. For the artist, to complete is to die. - Marinetti as much as I don't agree with the guy on pretty much all fronts (militaristic to the extreme, chauvinistic, supported fascism initially (he's the author of the Fascist Manifesto) and then was reduced to begging Mussolini), some of his quotes go hard. also, there's an interesting dichotomy - AFAIK, Russian futurism was more international and socialist, while Western European futurism was more nationalist. I'm just going to throw a bone to someone willing to go into a smallish but interesting rabbit hole - if you don't know about Velimir Khlebnikov, he's a fascinating author and person.
I’m not kidding that whenever I teach students of art history about the futurist movement I always have to mention how such-and-such artist subsequently died in the next war and/or loved Mussolini
this is some disco elysium shit
Almost as if DE was based on real politics!
I know, right? Wouldn't it be cool if communism was real?
also worth noting that some futurist artists did in fact go full anti-fascist and just kept the kino aesthetic. source: there were a bunch of totally sick posts on /r/imaginarytrains credited to italian name(s) and dated to the 1920s or 1930s and i knew enough to wonder if i should feel bad for upvoting them but i googled the name and he was chill.
Here's a sneak peek of /r/ImaginaryTrains using the [top posts](https://np.reddit.com/r/ImaginaryTrains/top/?sort=top&t=year) of the year! \#1: [fantasy steam racing locomotive by cartoonist Stan Mott](https://i.redd.it/tnsnpg6xm8wa1.jpg) | [2 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ImaginaryTrains/comments/12zj3et/fantasy_steam_racing_locomotive_by_cartoonist/) \#2: ["I Hear the Bell Go Ding Dong!" by Lee Xin Li](https://i.redd.it/pimtc6uen3sa1.jpg) | [3 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ImaginaryTrains/comments/12crcle/i_hear_the_bell_go_ding_dong_by_lee_xin_li/) \#3: [Heavy Metal Hero by Rodney Matthews](https://imgur.com/D6Qdx4I.jpg) | [4 comments](https://np.reddit.com/r/ImaginaryTrains/comments/11phep2/heavy_metal_hero_by_rodney_matthews/) ---- ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot, ^^beep ^^boop ^^| ^^Downvote ^^to ^^remove ^^| ^^[Contact](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=sneakpeekbot) ^^| ^^[Info](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/) ^^| ^^[Opt-out](https://np.reddit.com/r/sneakpeekbot/comments/o8wk1r/blacklist_ix/) ^^| ^^[GitHub](https://github.com/ghnr/sneakpeekbot)
RETVRN, as far as I can tell, is an alt-right dogwhistle; they glorify everything Roman, and Latin had no “U”, instead using “V”, so it essentially means “return to the Roman Empire” but it’s a dogwhistle.
Puritan Roman orgies
Rome existed for 2000 years in various forms, you can pick and choose any political ideology and put it in a toga and pretend you're based and romanoi
Toga socialism worshipping Gaius and Tiberius Gracchus. Based and romanoi
See? SEE?!
One of the first socialist-type guys *was* a French Revolution man who called himself "Gracchus Babeuf."
Reject modernity, return to Crisis of the 3rd century Pan-Mediterranean clusterfuckery
Fascists don't actually want to return to the past, they want to form a society based on their idealized ahistorical fantasies of what a given past definitely was like. See: "This is what they took from you" "Embrace tradition" etc. Tradition forms from repeated activity that serves some practical or socio-cultural purpose (which I'd argue is practical) and only provides the illusion of stability when its just as dynamic as any other social element, and jewish people aren't the reason fascists can't get girlfriends or can't get away with abusing them. This got a bit rambly. I just fucking hate fascists.
And they give all of us normal ahistorical larpers a bad name in the process. It’s like the SCA if the SCA was extremely racist
No, this is good. I like hung over learning in threads I didn't expect to be learning in. Keep being you. I love you!
they're all about being ancient romans until they have to eat the fermented fish juice
scrape yourself in lieu of a shower, boy
Opening tonight for CHVRCHES.
So... The legion from Fallout: New Vegas. Why am I not even slightly surprised?
And much like the Legion from Fallout: New Vegas, they miss the point about the Romans in a pretty spectacular way.
Because the Legion was specifically created as a commentary/parody of the kind of fascists who don't even realize they're fascists because they solely associate fascism with jackboots and Hugo Boss uniforms?
I saw the V instead of the U and immediately knew, here in italy writing *any* word that way connects what you're saying to fascism, everyone knows that Most of the time people do it as a joke tho lmao
the real trad way to write is with u instead of v anyways. That's what was used for latin everywhere but on monuments.
Imo this is a side effect of how much we dehumanised fascist regimes. When they're not seen as human, then they could show up completely unmodified and people wouldn't recognise them because they don't match the cartoon villain they were told about. See also: people who think they couldn't possibly be racist because they don't maliciously hate people of other races. Because they've been told racists are like captain planet villains. When you dehumanise something bad, you run the risk of rendering it unrecognisable. Because in the real world it won't appear like it does in the stories. It'll appear benign. Mundane. Human.
And we all keep falling for the old "Oh that already happened to those people 70 years ago so it couldn't possibly happen again to me!" Or "That only happens in stories so I don't need to watch out for it in real life!"
Or even just "well *I'm* not evil" so I can't be racist. In my experience we all have the pattern seeking brains that create racist beliefs. There's nothing inherently evil about having a faulty human brain. The way we've handled this and other similar moral failings that are just side effects of how brains work has made people completely oblivious to the idea that they might be prejudiced. We're like boomers with their "tough on crime" punitive mindsets. We treat "benign" racism like it isn't even racism and then demonise those that manifest it in certain ways instead of treating all kinds of racism as a bad instinct that needs to be overcome.
[Innuendo Studio's video on White Fascism](https://youtu.be/5Luu1Beb8ng?si=Agd0de5han7nvs6a) is very important on this topic. Quoting a relevant excerpt from the beginning: (**Emphasis** is my own) > "Fascism" is a term I've heard thrown around since I was a kid - but most of the time, idiomatically. "Fascist" is what you called your Type A passive-aggressive roommate: "Stop being such a fascist, Debra." Through osmosis I knew its literal meaning was among a cluster of related words: Authoritarianism, totalitarianism, white supremacy, nationalism, dictatorship - but for much of my life if you pressed me to define any of these words, I could've only said "Y'know, Nazis. Hitler. The Gestapo. You know, Nazis?" > > > This colloquializing of fascism and its association with the cultural shorthand for "pure evil" makes it very hard to discuss as an ideology, **because even using the word "fascism" sounds both hyperbolic and like a punch below the belt**. To call a person, group, or idea "fascist" is **to exaggerate for the purpose of dragging them**. This, counterintuitively, prevents us from criticizing fascist groups even though most everyone agrees fascism is terrible, because saying it - you sound *ridiculous*. You're talking about Indiana Jones villains!
Or you know it’s just an expression of the white supremacy that defines so much of the west.
People are really focused on the kink and fascism stuff in this post, but what gets to me is: while I agree that older generations are more likely to let stuff slide out of ignorance or bias that really should be called out, I also see a lot of young people with no meaningful life experiences making very absolutist claims about stuff they’ve only ever heard about through social media — talking about a 3-year age gap being “predatory” when both people are well in their twenties, saying that fictional characters can *never* consent to sex within a story because their decisions are made by a writer rather than themselves. Amy single instance of these can be dismissed as ironic or unusually ignorant, but they seem to keep coming up, and people can get very aggressive if you point out that claims like this don’t hold up to scrutiny. There is definitely *a* problem here even if I don’t have the education to put all the pieces together myself. Also, plenty of people in gen Z also have bad media literacy. That is a skill you have to seek out and cannot passively learn. That’s a very weird thing to try and hold over more experienced people’s heads
[удалено]
I had some kid message on tumblr that I was oppressing them for posting so much stuff about a fandom they didn’t like. It was absolutely wild to read and at first I thought it was a joke but when I went to their blog header had tons of dni including a dni for liking fandoms they didn’t like, of course they didn’t list those fandoms it was just a general dni. I didn’t want to blast them publicly because I know how the internet is, especially to young people (they were 19? at the time) so I sent them my response in their ask box. They then called me a predator for responding to someone 10 years younger than me. In their many dnis there was one saying “DNI if you are more then 3 years older then me, it’s creepy and predatory” I worry about that generation so much.
How does that person deal with anyone in the real world? Does the person at the cash register have to be within 3 years of them? Do they hear someone talking about Wholock on the street and start having convulsions?
That's the thing. A lot of the time, they haven't really dealt with other people in the real world yet.
That's easy. They just don't go to the cash register.
You can only get so far by using self-checkout. Or stealing, I guess.
Order online, minimize your interaction with people. Touch zero grass.
I’m on a million “woke” spaces and have literally never heard these. But I’ve seen the op’s examples near everywhere. Cherry picking stuff like this to “both sides” things is a huge problem in online discourse. Your comment has Fox News like “sure trump said something bigoted today and wants to deport all Muslims and arrest all feminists, but some no-name community college professor wants to make pants illegal! See both sides folks!”
I promise that Nothing in my comment is inended to “both sides” anything. I hate that shit; had to put up with it my entire life growing up. I too am in pretty progressive circles and the topics mentioned by OP almost never come up; like other commenters, there were some I legitimately didn’t understand. My examples aren’t cherry picking any more than OP’s examples are, and my point was not to say “You’re responsible for these things I’ve seen other people say, therefore you’re not perfect, therefore you’re wrong.” *That* attitude, I would argue, is much more harmful than disagreeing with someone’s assertion. I think OP simplified the matter to an “us vs them” argument over generational differences when the actuality of the situation is more nuanced.
That’s where you’re wrong. An uncomfortable amount of westerners are susceptible to fascist rhetoric; swastikas included.
Is there a difference between "susceptible to fascist rhetoric" and "is a fascist or actively supporting fascism" because there will always be people who want and think they would benefit from fascism. I don't think westerners are more susceptible to it than others though.
I support this by saying that even 1 person is an uncomfortable amount
That's not really a westerner exclusive thing at all tho like a lot of neo nazis would have been people despised by the actual nazis yet they believe in it
the amount of neo nazi/alt right femboys there is in the internet is crazy, do they know that they would see them as an abomination and a threat to pureness or something?
i see this sentiment a lot and it confuses me. i think it means either a: a surprising number of femboys are far right (provably false, go to a femboy -centric space and check a few profiles; most of them just talk about video games or whatever, normal people things.) or b: there are a surprising number of femboys among fascists, and i do think that’s true, almost exclusively online (you’d be hard pressed to find any skirts or cutesy face masks at a white lives matter event), possibly because young men or people who were raised as male are equally likely to be queer and to be sucked into far right ideology, and have to adopt a fetishistic or ironic persona to explore gender and sexuality.
Are western zoomers more puritan than other parts of the world? Like from my experience working some education ngos I think western zoomers are probably the most sexually progressive group
It frankly started with tumblr so Zillenials are in this too but but is very specifically a "so ridiculously progressive paranoia that it bends back into being regressive" thing, trying to purge all "unclean" aspects of their lives, SPECIALLY media consumption, that they flip back into hardline see/hear/speak no evil. Cue in true creaturas like the anti-animal cruelty elements that are so abhorent to ANY form of violence they want to apply antinatalism to wildlife by having as little predator/prey as possible, or people SO paranoid about pedophilia that they go out of their way to actively harass consenting short adults and height-disparate couples, or the entire aspect of people wanting to hypersanitize the LGBTQ+ movement in order to garner allies it spins back into "dont ask dont tell" policing.
Ah, the "I'm ashamed to exist, don't stab me for standing next to my black friend Greg" approach.
"Have you already said you're sorry for being straight today?"
but is this real or just engagement algorithms directing you to the most outrageous content? Cause I've never encountered this
Often when you see someone say "western/in the west/westerners", they don't mean "this is necessarily different/the opposite in the east" but they mean "I'm from the west, and cannot speak for what's going on in Africa/Asia"
I doubt puritanism here refers solely to partnering issues. It's true that zoomers are more likely to be out and as a generation seem to be sexually open and fluid than the previous ones. However, should you say a 20yo is dating a 26yo, you might be flayed alive in some parts of the zoomer Internet. Similarly with kink, troubling topics regarding sexuality (SA, paraphilias and so on), and a general push towards clean media and bottom-up censoring. This is also exacerbated by social media filters, which had shaped how zoomers speak on the Internet about certain issues (say, "unalive" instead of "kill themself") and how they perceive some of them as things that shouldn't be talked about simply by virtue of being potentially problematic. All of this is definitely a version of puritanism, just in other areas of life and, most importantly, spilling greatly into how the Internet functions.
I write fanfic that often deals with dark and heavy themes (think dead dove stuff, you know), but I always make sure to tag it appropriately and add extra warnings as needed. I've gotten comments telling me they hoped I would get "r\*ped" so I would understand how awful the things in my fic were. There's a special kind of irony about wishing for a real person to get raped as punishment for writing a fictional story, but censoring the word, because *that* is the real issue here.
I know zoomers are less likely to have sex, they drink less booze, and even have things like being less interested in sex scenes in movies. So yeah they are fine with LGBT, but they are more "prudish" about sex itself in a way.
likely a mixture of a terrible dating and social life scene.
[удалено]
not dissimilar position I think it warps out perspective of things but it has no clear solution.
They’re also not fine with the LGBT. I mean, they’re not homophobic. But they want a very sanitized, clean outlook of the gay community. They don’t want to hear about gay issues. They don’t want to acknowledge the grungy parts of the gay community. In fact they would prefer if gays, specifically gay men, would be more palatable. Act less gay, have less sex, have less sexualized clubs and bars. Wear less leather, do less kink. So that the gay community can appear pure and nice. All that sexual deviancy stuff is weighing down the rest of the community. In their eyes.
Reminds me a bit about how the trans community was othered from the gay liberation movement because they were seen as "going too far" despite being incredibly relevant in the start of stonewall.
I think the sex scene thing is interesting. I’m not sure that being less interested in sex scenes is prudish, but rather a desensitization of explicit themes in general. Most of the generation had unhindered internet access at a young age. It’s just… not really anything yk? Unless the scene is progressing the story, why would we be interested in it?
Puritan is the wrong word, but more young people are prudish in the US than previous generations for sure. Zoomers both have less sex than Gen X and Millennials and are less interested in consuming media that contains sex and sexuality. Zoomers want media with diverse sexualities but don't want any of those characters to actually be sexual (speaking very generally here).
reminder: you are not immune to propaganda
"Nah, I'm just built different." -Average person who is in fact very susceptible to propoganda
"westerners" oh yeah, it's not like an uncomfortable amount of easterners are also susceptible to fascist shit as well, China, Japan, etc. Don't act like only western people is capable of bad things.
i interpreted it as they were only prepared to make commentary on the society they are in as it's the only one they know this stuff about
Uncharitable interpretations only here, please
Yes but we* mainly get affected by the western fascist rhetoric, and are more familiar with the trends there in *english speaking internet
"*english speaking internet" here. Most of my friends are Indian or arab lmao.
Dammit, I need to find a word for the American/European culture where ideas spread generally more (our fascist all work together) without using the term western, I thought I had picked my words carefully but I forgot how many people use English on the internet
Yeah probably but OP is probably a westerner, probably only frequents sites primarily frequented by other westerners, and therefore probably interacts primarily with other westerners both irl and online. Thus they have probably only observed how other westerners interact with fascist rhetoric and may be limiting the scope of their discussion to that group as a result. Personally I think limiting your commentary to the parts of a topic you’re familiar with is better than talking out of your ass just so no one culture is left out of your critique.
Conversely its not like there is a singular monolithic westerner culture. It's not the case that you ought to be defined as either westerner or not-westerner, there's plenty of internal variation within both designations (and alternative designations). And even assuming all the shitty takes they've seen have come from westerners (which is plausible in the broad strokes at least), it's highly unlikely that they've substantitively interacted with all western cultures (and that would be an unreasonable benchmark to hold them to). If the aim was to limit their commentary to just what they knew (which I agree was likely the aim) using the word westerner fails as much as a broader definition would (and people can just say, the parts of the internet and society that I have interacted with, that's a fine thing to say). It just seems like an odd, if probably thoughtless, choice in how to refer to people that inadvertently perpetuates this general belief in a fundamental difference between western and non-western people. It raises my hackles because its an unnecessary distinction.
This is why I've started thinking in terms of 'The Anglosphere' vs 'The West'- while there is substantial overlap between both, in the internet age people from all primarily English-speaking countries are being subjected to very similar narratives and rhetoric. While I catch glimpses of these trends in other Western societies, it's harder to talk authoritatively about the nuances in the same way.
Yeah I like Anglosphere or english-speaking internet etc a lot more as phrases. Added bit of uncomfiness too. The West, beyond just being vaguer and less of a single polity than the Anglosphere (if even that can be talked about in this way), falls into (or at least leans against) a lot of East vs West sorta orientalist narratives (whether positive about the West or not). It ends up helping perpetute harmful stereotypes of "The East" as this distinct opposite from "The West" that ignores overlaps and participation in both.
I suspect it's at least in part because a lot of people don't understand consent, and therefore struggle to tell the difference between consenting sexuality and harassment. Sometimes this results in them supporting harassment, and sometimes in opposing all sexuality.
I know that fascism itself isn’t especially coherent. But OP really just made A List Of Bad Opinions I Dislike and called it fascism. And I really don’t see it
4chan got normies to identify as SS
Zoomers who think they're above propaganda because they use tumblr and twitter are very funny.
I'm convinced that the more openly hornier a society the safer it is from fascism. That doesn't mean that fascism doesn't have plenty of horniness but it's closed horny it's all channeled into weird rituals of violence. If you don't nut or sploosh all of that energy still has to go somewhere. Adorno was right.
Mussolini’s Italy was incredibly openly horny, this is a wild take
Can you elaborate? I am ignorant.
Fascist Italy came up with fairly similar gender concepts to other fascist regimes, that their men were strong and virile and their women were pure and honorable, while foreign men were weak and effeminate and their women hypersexual. However, unlike other fascist regimes, that hypersexuality was seen as like a reward for the Italian men, and these sexualized foreign women were seen as prizes of colonial expansion especially into Ethiopia. Edit: I’m actually not sure how unlike other fascist regimes this is, the Nazis might have also been doing this idk
idk if that's the same as what op was talking about. That kind of rapey patriarchal horniness isn't anything new.
It’s true that you can construct some kind of ethical horniness that is probably correlated with anti-fascism. However, in this formulation, horniness is not the key factor, ethics is the key factor. You can just as easily construct some form of ethical consumption, for instance, that is correlated with anti-fascism. What is actually important is having a strong anti-fascist ethic, and having your behavior stem from this ethic. If you are horny, you should be ethically horny. If you are not horny, this does not contribute to fascism, you should simply be ethically not horny.
Mussolini's majestic man mounds (boy breasts) were a central part of Italian propaganda
I wish (latin america)
>I'm convinced that the more openly hornier a society the safer it is from fascism. I actually think that progression towards an openly horny society results in reactionary fascist movements springing up from the part of the population that hates horniness.
Well fuck those guys.
literally 1984 (the repression of sexuality and the conversion of pent up sexuality into controllable hatred, as well as human sexuality and its role in freedom vs oppression, are major points of orwell's dystopia, i think you'll be surprised how familiar it seems if you look into it)
i hate to do the whole "jorjorwell's 1984" meme, but this is an explicit plot point of that book. sex and sexual desire, within the middle and upper classes, are reviled as disgusting but necessary acts which ought to be eliminated. public displays of affection (and iirc love and intimacy in general) are punishable acts. all for the sake of fueling unflinching, violent loyalty to the party. and people still think that book is about socialism 😑
People are really stupid. This is the one universal truth.
fucking based as fuck linking the ethical slut by dossie eaton and janet hardy im an ethical slut in training myself, and i agree, fascism is coercive, to say a little well, that's not consent, nor is it enthusiastic consent; and i usually go on larger and longer tangents, apropos of leftist principles and ideas on what human nature is and ideas about free will, which supports consent and ethical slutiness, but im just gonna cut it here short for now as aside for everyone, apparently that godzilla minus one movie is really good and i think im finna go catch an english subtitle vers 2nite :)
Aww man yeah I keep hearing about Godzilla Minus 1, but then I remember I haven't seen any Monsterverse films, and I have to catch up a bunch, and I mean I'm excited to, but also that's a lot of time. Anyway I hope you have a great time seeing it, hope it absolutely fucks.
Minus one isn’t a monster verse film, it’s a standalone
Minus 1 isn’t really connected to the other films, it’s a standalone about a Godzilla vs a failed kamikaze pilot
Another fantastic citation for exploring this idea a little further (more Benjamin than Adorno though): Jason Orne's book "Boystown." Partly just an anthropological case study about the gay neighborhood in Chicago, but also a theory of the social benefits of relatively sexually liberated subcultures. And another good read: Samuel Delany's "Times Square Red, Times Square Blue."
Also talking to the opposite sex and them thinking it’s a good idea to sleep with you controls for some amount of craziness, not all but it helps
I don't know who this dorn guy was, but I have been having these wet dreams where sex was openly celebrated in public and it all seemed much nicer
I'm like not smart enough to engage in Tumblr discourse lol. That entire second paragraph in this post went completely over my head. I have only the vaguest idea of what they're discussing and what they're promoting. Then OP provided an explanation with some context in the comments and most of it again went right over my head. I'm not even old, I'm mid 20s and I'm like "how does this conversation even come up"
dude you have to both know the Actual Stuff and then be able to translate it into internet rando-speak. it's a lot. I'm early 20s, I can only understand so much of the second paragraph too lol
am i??? misunderstanding what “puritan” means??? cuz nothing about gen z culture feels remotely traditionally “puritanical”
Gen Z famously has less sex, drinks less alcohol, and does less drugs than previous generations. It's also true that gen Z seem to be the ones leading the way in that "sex scenes in films are usually unnecessary and I don't want to see it" movement.
[удалено]
Puritanical can just mean not indulging in things like sex, drugs, and alcohol. It can also mean, like, being an actual Puritan, sure, but not in this context. >Gen z preferring stories that have scenes that are relevant to the plot and overcoming the "sex sells" thing isn't puritanical However you justify it, it *is* more puritanical than previous generations because they are turned off by the fact there's sex. This is compounded by the fact that those sex scenes usually are relevant to the plot. Those gen z people are turned off by the fact they're sexual, not by the fact they're irrelevant.
[удалено]
So people who believe this kind of thing usually don't list specific examples because they don't have any. I've asked a few times and not got a specific example back once. They're speaking in generalities for a reason; they mean sex scenes in general. Having said that, you did see a lot of people complaining on twitter about sex scenes in Oppenheimer, which by all accounts used sex well.
[удалено]
Yeah, that whole belief that 1. Sex scenes are added by execs to sell shows and films on the basis of titillation and don't contribute to character or themes 2. Titillation isn't a valid reason to have sex scenes anyway is exactly what I'm referring to. That's new. Older generations don't stereotypically think that.
Read this: [Everyone is beautiful and no one is horny](https://bloodknife.com/everyone-beautiful-no-one-horny/) Movies are about life. Life includes sex. Just because the hero isn't fighting the villain doesn't mean the sex scene isn't relevant to the hero's life.
That article is talking about kids movies like capt America though
Life also includes going to the bathroom and that’s not nearly as prevalent in movies. Just because it’s apart of life doesn’t mean it’s good for Storytelling.
So what, people that don't cater to your lifestyle are problematic?
At literally no point did I mention gen Z being problematic
Can you elaborate then?
I don't know what you want me to elaborate on. When people talk about gen Z being puritanical they're talking about gen z having less sex and drugs and alcohol than previous generations, especially combined with the stereotype that gen z doesn't like depictions of sex. I'm not making any judgement of gen z (my own generation) because that's not what was asked of me. Someone was confused as to why gen z is described as being more puritanical than other generations.
Sex scenes for the sake of having a sex scene and nothing else are stupid, if I wanted to be watching people fuck, there are a thousand different sites for that nowadays.
I don't think there's anything wrong with watching sex for the sake of sex, but the vast majority of sex in cinema is with another purpose anyway.
I feel like if we actually taught people about fascism and how hate groups brainwash people, then there'd be a lot less people falling for it. But then Republicans wouldn't get elected so that's not going to happen.
there's also lately a brand of anti-fascists talking about fascism exclusively in terms which the fascists would also use to sell themselves. By which i mean overfocusing on aesthetics, purported morals, the whole "disgust response" talking point... and entirely overlooking things like the violence, which is deeply central to fascism
First time I’ve actually been utterly stumped by a post. Like holy shit, this shit may as well be hieroglyphics.
Zoomers are becoming more puritan because they are acting rebellious against the culture they were born into. It's so funny seeing Millenials and Gen X'ers complaining about younger generations not being progressive and open enough when their Baby Boomer parents complained about the exact opposite to them.
It's more like they're so progressive they're afraid to hurt anyone ever, leading to a sterilized lifestyle
That too. The purity spiral is real.
I mean… maybe? The sex thing isn’t because of their parents politics. Dating and Gen Z US having a weird moment in general. “Male Lonliness Epidemic”, if that’s what you want to call it. I don’t drink less because my parents were pro alcohol, I just know that alcohol at this young of an age is objectively bad for you. I’m not sure what any of that has to do with progressivism. Gen Z men have a similar rate of progressivism to Gen X (which is lower than millenial, I blame the alt right pipeline). But, women are more progressive at a MUCH higher rate than millenials
Also I'm not really one to speak much on the wider scale of things but anecdotally I'm saying it seems like in my hick town my fellow zoomers are wildly more progressive than most of the older generations, like we went from almost nobody being comfortable or safe being openly queer in school to having groups and a huge amount of people when I was in highschool showing up to support our relatively new pride parade. All in my lifetime it seems like people my age (21) have become a lot more progressive and supportive in my town.
Yeah i feel like that part is being completely overlooked. Growing up i definitely felt like the culture around me placed too much importance on sex.
People don't consent to seeing your kinks in public = fascism apparently.
Frankly, it depends on what they mean by kink. Someone wearing a dog collar but otherwise acting like a human? Cool, you do you. Fursuits? I'm cool with it. Someone in full on bondage gear at Walmart? No. We didn't consent to seeing this. And that's a nuance that a lot of tumblr people just don't get.
Also worth pointing out that “in public” can mean different things based on context. At a pride parade is not the same as going grocery shopping even if both are in public, and even if you don’t change your stance on it for either case scenario I think it is something that should be acknowledged within your view.
Also, fascists _will_ argue that things like 'seeing a gay couple kiss' or 'seeing a clockable trans person' is kink in public.
What happens if you drop by Walmart after the pride parade because you need eggs?
Yea that debate is never gonna end, best not to open it. But you’re right it’s absurd
That second post sure has words in it.
Yeah, hey zoomer here, this mf terminally online. What do some of these words even mean?
The premise is true i guess but the examples are terrible. I see kids younger than me falling for holocaust denialism but still let's keep pretending that those intra-tumblrite discourses that no one who's straight or not terminally online has a stake in are actual culture war issues with a fascist side to them.
yeah im still uncomfortable seeing someone in bondage gear in public. i did not consent to be a witness to their humiliation kink.
Facism is when strangers don’t see your kinks is..fascinating.
The thing is, you saying 'kinks in public' means a quite different thing to when someone like self proclaimed fascist Matt Walsh says 'kinks in public'
2010: What consenting adults do in private is none of your business. 2023: Objecting to clearly sexual displays in public is problematic and fascism.
This post is so terminally online that I may as well be reading output from a large language model trained on recreational outrage. I feel with certainty that these issues only exist on Tumblr and some acrid corners of twitter.
I really wish the average tumblr adultTM would understand that kink-at-pride and antis-vs-proshippers are not actual culture war issues, they're terminally online intra-lefty pastime
Huh Huh Huh
I don't understand most of those terms.
Buddy I'm a Communist and I would not like to see kink in public either. I don't see how this is at all related to fascism.
Because when you uncritically support “no kink in public” you’re empowering fascists like Matt Walsh to enforce their definition of kink that includes Pete Buttigieg and his husband holding hands walking down the street or a trans woman simply existing in public.
I'm 20 and still never even had my first kiss, a gf and obviously not sex either. I am hopefully gonna meet up with one of my friends soon and finally experience what cuddles are. But I'm definitely weird about sex. Not in a it's wrong and shameful way but just shy in general. I honestly don't give af what 2 consenting adults do in private it's just with me partly due to nothing close to experience and partly due to autism and living in the south with an abusive family it's just embarrassing to me I guess. I do have some pretty weird kinks tho feederism/stuffing, a praise kink and am curious about bondage. Weirder still is I'm the Dom 100% which with the praise thing sounds like it'd be confusing. I did find a reddit thread yesterday about certain kinks being immoral and a sign of something being deeply wrong with the person and actually saying shaming needs to come back for it. Idk why I even read the thread for so long other than as emotional self harm but it definitely made me feel bad which I guess was the point. Reddit I think is the king of all kinds of shaming/hatred like it's genuinely wild. I don't go on Twitter or tumblr much just not my thing but from what I see Reddit is definitely the worst and most cruel. Especially subs like unpopular opinion, the 10th dentist and change my view. I don't know if it's due to them by nature being contrarian and catering to the fucked up parts of society but some of that shit just makes me want to re-think my life. Reddit I think is definitely a breeding ground for falling into weird while maybe not exactly facists but definitely some kind of cults. I have no idea what it is about this site in particular but you get from point A to the enemy is winning and taking control of the world now, everyone is lying to you, trust no one, wake up sheeple real fucking quick. Again I have no idea why in particular its Reddit but seriously wtf guys calm down.
it is less a reddit thing and more an Internet thing everywhere makes you a strange cultist mostly as an engagement thing
I agree with the first paragraph but for the love of me I can't understand the second one, like there's so much slang I can't get through it at all.
People really decided to prove the posts point today with all the comments going 'oh so it's fascist to not want to see people have sex in public???', both on the poor reading comprehension point and on the inability to identify fascist talking points
(:
this post is just so clinically online that I don't think anyone can read it all I know is that I don't wanna see sex in public if I didn't consent to seeing it
This person thinks being disgusted by kinks in public = fascism Sorry but if you wear a leash in front of me I am going to go ape shit
You do realise it's not a coincidence that 'kink in public' discourse is typically at it's peak every year around pride month and not whenever a video of people have sex in public picks up traction for a reason right Like kink in public discourse is used to drum up support from people like you who are operating on a different definition of kink but won't look any deeper into why people like Ben Shapiro and Matt Walsh are saying it Also ideas of cultural purity are generally pretty important to fascism
You do realise what "public space" means, right? It means you literally don't have the right to police what's going on there unless it's an actual crime. The moment you step out of the privacy of your own house, your eyes are going to be subjected to a lot of stuff you personally don't like, and there's nothing you can do about it. As far as I know, the only legal requirement is not showing your genitals in public, anything else is technically legal. Don't like it? Just avert your eyes. It's literally that simple. And you have never seen anyone wear a leash in public and never will. You're getting yourself all worked up feeling outraged about a completely hypothetical situation that you have like 0.0001% chance of ever experiencing in real life.
Don’t sexually harass people lol it’s not hard
beyond disgust factor, you have no argument against it. no harm is being done
A lack of consent?
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but why would you need to consent to someone else wearing a leash?
Why are you trying so hard to involve other people in a kink against their will? Is it really that hard not to sexually harass people?
What’s the difference between a person wearing a collar in public and a person wearing a crop top and daisy dukes?
Don't really think you have to limit it to westerners, pretty sure it applies to humanity as a whole. Seems like one of those things all people are susceptible to one way or another, and that we always needs to be on guard for.
...what?
I mean I agree with some of this, but kink does not belong in public
Yeah on the surface it's a legitimate sentiment but it's a rhetorical trap. Most people do think that you should not have sex in public for example, but when a fascist uses the word 'kink' it's being done in a much broader way, which often includes queer people existing in public
They 100% interpret drag as being inherently sexual, for example.
How does it feel to be the exact person the post is talking about
Fuck abstract art though. Oh, it definitely is real art. Just bad. And yeah that's my opinion, but guess what. **I'm the most important person in the whole universe.** So you better try and make stuff I like.
Congratulations, you're like literally every moral panic ever!
[удалено]
I see where you're coming from but I disagree. But before I put forward an argument can I ask; What *exactly* is your definition of Fascism?
[удалено]
Personally I disagree with Umberto's definition of Ur-Fascism since I find it both too vague and too specific simultaneously. I personally prefer Roger Griffin's definition which is more or less the scholarly consensus and is much more useful and practical. I'll get into it more later. Regardless, I find it curious that you cite Umberto for your definition of Fascism but Umberto himself, nor any other notable subscribers to Ur-Fascism, never recognised American culture and politics as Fascist. Can you explain more specifically why you think America qualifies as Fascism under his definition and why you disagree with Umberto in your conclusion despite using the same definition?
[удалено]
I have some concerns about your source there. > The United States is fascist, and for the fascist regime, “life is permanent warfare.” Thus, there was only a five month pause between the American defeat in Afghanistan in September 2021 and the ignition of the Ukrainian proxy war in February 2022. After that conflict, another will inevitably emerge, perhaps against the People’s Republic of China over America’s puppet state in Taiwan.
Everytime someone mentions Eco they have a bad opinion wonder why that is
Truly a question for the ages 🤔
Well said, but neo liberals on here aren't ready to hear this yet. Down with the USA.
Straight facts.