OttoboyEmpire

pin every post -- nothing is wrong, everything a banger.

i don't care about what happens in a liberated society. i care about what happens in a (current) neoliberal, thatcherrite non-society, where everyone is merely individuals, where the collective good is spit on, where the profit motive creates uncaptured externalities which befall those on the losing end of class distinctions. it is in this world wherein online pornography is incentivized, produced and commodified; and it is this one which is reified precisely by this sort of production in particular-- because a world in which you can instantly gratify yourself alone, all the time, in lieu of having to go outside and talk to and then fuck someone else, is one which forgoes the development of constitutive attachments with others, a necessary requirement of community.

if some people are so invariably into consuming porn, i would suggest they opt for capitalism -- though Marx may have allotted for gooning in the morning before fishing at midday and critiquing after dinner, capitalism will surely provide a more varied and variegated porn under the profit motive. all that is holy is profaned, and these people (who, apparently, are NOT the product of their environments, but would be necessarily just, really, irreducibly horny) would be better off there.

i think there's probably a qualitative difference between vulgar graffiti and having a tiny machine in your pocket that has, and will be incentivized to create more, limitless simulations of people fucking for your gratification at any time.

when i jerk off all day to online pornography, i'm not jerking off to porn inherently; i'm jerking off to porn within a neoliberal order which purports to best provide individual preference satisfaction but because of the profit motive and class realities provides a world incentivized to indulge my selfish impulses at the expense of workers and the collective good and my own opportunity for actual intimacy.

no one cares about porn inherently, no one jerks off to porn inherently.

radlib take. sex is great, and people should be having it, and online pornography, which commodifies the most intimate and shared human experiences, and only serves to further atomize and alienate us from each other and ourselves, sucks. it produces less sex and less intimacy; it creates a market which degrades and exploits.

we easily diagnose mindless consumption as bad and deadening of the spirit, but yet people refuse to admit this when it comes to frictionless consumption of sexual gratification. why is this, why is the need to signal that one isn't a prude require an endorsement of gooning?

is it really implausible that a dude named hasan is getting detained by tsa lol

okay but he was obviously only taken aside because he kept triggering the metal detector with all his goofy ass thumb rings and pukashells and other assorted accessory bullshit.

Trump admin signaled that they are tired of Bibi's laundry and now all of a sudden moral beacons like Friedman and Borrell are talking like they've been against the genocide the entire time. These people are totally spineless, and probably know that the horse has left the barn and will do anything to pretend that they didn't cosign world-historical crimes.

ok sure. wonder if tagle's background and its upshot for the Church's relationship w/China led to him being passed over.

totally. hopefully the Left can rise as an actual force in the west soon enough and the Church can return to counting angels on pinheads.

the laundry thing is so funny -- presumably bibi is missing out on being able to wear his favorite shirts or ties, just so american tax payers can cover his laundering instead of israeli ones.

voice for labor in Christendom*

okay but the communards and other rising socialist parties must have been a more of a live issue and threat than the foreign Other of the PRC. i only mean to suggest here that, because socialism in the West is weak, if the Church means to renew its stance on social teaching, there's probably daylight to be more rhetorically against the forces of Capital, if new Leo were so inclined.

he publicly rejected Vance's defense of Ordo Amoris -- that's something. but doesn't appear that he's a liberation theologian or anything.

and as @funkystuff implies, taking the name leo suggests probably a renewed articulation of Catholic social thinking.