Alt Text

HomeTimelineSearch
Show parent replies

The post below is a reply to another user

view in bsky.app
willow
i had more thoughts btw
willow
it’s so bad to post publicly bc my diary thoughts are like missing 12 lemmas between each proposition that i just leave out for my own convenience
willow
alt text backfill (wtf was she cooking)
# diary › thinking about this more just want to reiterate the point i made before when we were talking abt this that basically she's trying to say: other people report sexual attraction when provided the stimulus of another person relatively decontextualized but i feel like the last part is doing the heavy lifting there's obviously no true decontextualized point, it's not as if people are attracted pure and simple to bodies in any sort of configuration or presentation but once you grant some context it's a degree of gradation at that point, or not even that (what would 'a gradation of qualitatively distinct contexts' mean?) so it's really like: my sexual attraction is most prominent when people are presented in a narrative context, particularly with certain genre-specific features and power dynamics i think it's a case of someone being confused by the way other people talk about their experiences very similar to the "internal monologue" discussion i'm thinking of an example
# diary › i'm thinking of an example willow Today at 9:11 AM so let's say a society was very oriented around sexual depictions of people who had been slimed so much so that it's like the dominant and borderline exclusive way me saying "eh slime girls aren't really my thing" isn't like a meaningful thing tho that's ofc banking on our current intuitions but the reality is, in that society ofc it would be meaningful and significant to define yourself that way so like i can see the vision of why it matters to differentiate but i feel like there's a lot of slippage from that more pragmatic and ironic use of a label and a full-blooded identity, in all its vicissitudes and that feels like part of the point or even the primary point, which is why i'm psychologically skeptical of the unifying and ordering function is dangerous in the foucaultian sense if the noint i'm trvino to make w the slime
diary › the point i'm trying to make w the slime example is that there's no transcendental existing types to fit into, which is obvious from our current social vantage point, but it may be more difficult for relations within sexual hegemony. my attitude is to distance myself from identity labels that hypostasize these contingencies. honestly im even skeptical of even constructing ideal types that give abstraction to move within (edited) it's so ripe for ideology in all honesty it feels like a gesture at radical escape that is enmeshed in identical technologies choking while masticating theoretical absurdities