Our Betters In Love (2)
Further to this recent tale of aching tenderness, it’s time for another visit to the pages of Slate, where our progressive betters mull the quandaries of modern living:
I’m a woman in my mid-30s, and I’ve identified as asexual and aromantic basically forever. A few months ago, something changed, and I experienced sexual attraction for the first time,
Ah, a sexual blossoming.
I’m kind of touch-averse,
Albeit complicated.
I befriended a man online. We were a little flirty right from the start, but I drew a hard line in the sand because he’s (unhappily) married, and that’s very much against my moral code.
Thank goodness for moral codes.
Our relationship escalated during this time and turned sexual (still just over text or online).
That hard line in the sand.
As we go further, though, I’m starting to wonder if I’m a terrible person for encouraging and enabling this man to cheat on his wife, just because he treats me in a way that no one else ever has. He tells me I’m beautiful and desirable and values me so much more than I am often able to value myself.
Yeah, screw the wife. I got mine and now I’m hot, baby.
I know you can’t tell me if I’m a terrible person,
Quiet at the back.
but am I doing a terrible thing? How do I find this kind of relationship with someone who is actually available, when being touched before I fully trust someone will give me a panic attack? Yes, I’m in therapy, and this is something that we’re working on, and no, I have no history of trauma—I just get extremely anxious about being touched.
Slate’s advice columnist offers a stern rebuke:
Stop this inappropriate virtual relationship.
And some progressive counsel:
You might have an easier time with people who are queer or polyamorous than with dude-ly dudes. So, maybe prioritise OkCupid and Feeld over Tinder.
Because someone with serious trust issues, in therapy, and prone to panic attacks, will doubtless thrive in the world of polyamory.
This being Slate, there is of course more niche moral agonising:
I am fat. Despite this, I’m in mostly good health (just a little joint and muscle pain), and for the first time since I was young, I love my body! I’ve been joining some fat-positive and fat-liberation movements, because, you know, we deserve to have rights and be a part of life! But lately, my foot has been hurting, and even though I am on good terms with my body, I’m noticing certain physical pains that I don’t remember having when I weighed even just 100 pounds less.
The word just appears to be doing some heavy lifting there. Apparently, 100 pounds is a small unit of weight gain. A gnat’s eyelash.
I think I would like to start trying to lose weight again, just until I get comfortable. Am I betraying a worthy cause by losing weight? I feel like a fraud for even thinking about it.
And elsewhere on the page, there’s this:
He wants our sex tape, but he just had a baby with another woman.
Oh, world of woe.
It was kind of the host to parse the question and explain to Jordan what it really meant.
I thought the same thing and was waiting for someone to explain to the host that group behaviour is the sum of individual behaviour and so whether you approach things from the top or the bottom you still have to change what indivduals do to change what groups do.
Peterson has incredible patience. I would have punched the guy in the nose at the end of the show.
Regarding Terry Jones, this probably won’t be satire.
Too bad, ’cause, The Pythons.
Amongst all the quite deserved praise and summaries, John Cleese quickly announced the definitive eulogy:
Two down, four to go!
explain to the host that group behaviour is the sum of individual behaviour
Someone who is does not have his own life in order is very unlikely to have any correct understanding of how to put society in better order. Furthermore, people in their teens and twenties are just too ignorant and need to live a while before making demands.
the Australian show features a performance, as in this example
oh dear lord … I can only believe that show is broadcast due to taxpayer funding?
Peterson has incredible patience.
Peterson’s “No” is the most incredible, effective Dad moment witnessed in a long time.
I can play just that bit over and over and it makes me smile each time.
oh dear lord … I can only believe that show is broadcast due to taxpayer funding?
Spot on Darleen, the ABC here is Australia costs us poor bloody taxpayers over $A1 billion per year, and produces acres of mediocre lightweight biassed crap across myriad TV, radio and on-line channels. Basically a self-indulgent bandwidth-wasting national disgrace.
Rant over
Spot on Darleen, the ABC here is Australia costs us poor bloody taxpayers over $A1 billion per year, and produces acres of mediocre lightweight biassed crap across myriad TV, radio and on-line channels. Basically a self-indulgent bandwidth-wasting national disgrace.
====
At least the BBC, which I imagine the ABC fondly believes it’s emulating, produced quality dramas and comedy; hell, Yes Minister alone is worth several years worth of TV license fees. Has the ABC produced anything of comprable quality?
Has the ABC produced anything of comprable quality?
I really think the answer to that is a short, bald “No”. They produce some of their own drama series, but they are so overladen with green wet left, feminist and social justice messages, and so poor in production values, as to be unwatchable.
And as to anything approaching “high culture”, forget it. Australia must be the only first world society where you will find more Shakespeare performances, and more adaptations of Dickens et al, on free-to-air commercial TV than on the national public broadcaster. Largely because the ABC’s policy is not to show any of “that old-fashioned stuff” at all.
Here endeth the second rant.
To be fair, ABC Radio is not too bad. It’s the TV and online output that’s egregious. It would be great if they scrapped all that, but it’s not going to happen.
produces acres of mediocre lightweight biassed crap across myriad TV, radio and on-line channels. Basically a self-indulgent bandwidth-wasting national disgrace.
CBC: Hold my beer, eh.
You would think that the willingness of men to declare they won’t date “woke” wymi- wyomi- whyomings would be a blessing. Why date them, possibly marry them, and make two people miserable?
Because the ones complaining are already miserable, and want some company apart from the Feminist Book Store Glee Club.