This was a fascinating read, by @moveincircles. I know I said I did not want to talk about it, but I've been (unwillingly) musing on why I am so morally horrified by this story—and was only physically grossed out by @Aella_Girl's similar antics. 1/
@moveincircles @Aella_Girl Aella seems like a genuine psychological outlier who *could* take pleasure in something like this. And she seems both more mentally robust and to have a MUCH higher IQ than Lilly Phillips, who is either an excellent actress or very naive and childlike. 2/
@moveincircles @Aella_Girl What is your culpability if you've chosen to do something to someone that they have asked you to do—but that you suspect (or even know) they don't *really* want? This is a question that's come up several times with friends who are polyamorous. 3/
@moveincircles @Aella_Girl Again, as with Aella, I suspect some outliers are fine with polyamory, but the cases I've known up close have involved attractive, charismatic men who wanted to have several girlfriends and whose girlfriends were desperately jealous & unhappy (which the guys very much knew). 4/
In BDSM circles, I believe they have (or used to have) a saying that any acts must be "safe, sane and consensual." This was probably consensual—even though that is straining my credibility a bit—but it was definitely neither safe nor sane. 5/
I identify as "high agentic," though I'd express it in terms of trait Disagreeableness. But maybe everyone thinks of themselves as a free agent? I'm also prudish. No sex outside of a serious relationship for me. But maybe I am an outlier in the other direction. 6/
I definitely think freedom is better for most women in most situations than coercion. More rapes occur in Pakistan than in Australia, I am certain. But freedom is *always* a double-edged sword because it also entails the ability to wreck oneself. 7/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I've just been watching the doco "Folau." Having an argument about it at home. I think Israel Folau's comments should have been, frankly, no big deal. It's surely a question of free speech and diversity of opinion. The important thing should be the sport. 1/ cc @ClydeRathbone
@ClydeRathbone But my housemate points out that famous sportsmen are role models—whether they like it or not—and also that the big money you're paid is not just for playing but for being a representative off the field of the values that sponsors like Qantas want associated with their brand. 2/
Playing footy for the Aussie national team is obviously not a right. I still think what this should have taught them is that they shouldn't have made the team were rainbow socks & sponsored the Yes campaign for marriage equality, knowing many players opposed it. 3/
1) I'm multiethnic and -national. Born in Scotland, but spent my early years in Pakistan & came to the UK in late childhood. My mother was Scottish, my father Parsi (Indian Zorostrian, born in Bombay) ...
2) In addition to Pakistan and the UK, I lived in Germany, the US, India and Argentina. I'm a naturalised Argentine citizen and a citizen of the UK by birth. I now live in Sydney, Australia.
3) Since Parsi identity is patrilineal, I consider myself one. I'm a lax but practising Zoroastrian. Though I don't believe in god(s), I am very attached to Parsi tradition and history. I'd love to be eaten by vultures after death (though that seems unlikely in New South Wales).
Germany has outlawed the chant "From the River to the Sea." I think this is deeply misguided and, in my alcohol- and food-coma induced Christmas insomnia (it's 3am here), I want to tell you why. 🧵1/
First of all, yes, I think the chant is inherently genocidal, since it presupposes the obliteration of Israel from the map (though I don't think all of those chanting it realise this). I'm a strong supporter of Israel. Let me first detail why. 2/
A large proportion of Israel's population (perhaps the majority) are Jews who have been expelled from their home countries in the Muslim Middle East, from countries that are systemically, vicious antisemitic, places where it is now illegal & dangerous to be a Jew. 3/
I was ambivalent about Israel a d fairly supportive of the Palestinian cause before 7 October. But the events then & the response to them from the Muslim world, the aid agencies, many academics & journalists, many Palestinians themselves ... it's changed my mind. Completely.
I'm not Jewish. I've never been to Israel. I'm not a fan of the Israeli right & I want the West Bank settlements dismantled. But I cannot be on the side of people who minimise, relativise, condone & reward (by trying to secure a victory for Hamas) 7 October.
I'd like the Palestinians to have a future, but I can't even see how that's possible. I hope it's possible but the first step would be to empower people who WANT a future for themselves, rather than just wanting to kill all Jews.
You can wallow in your victimhood for generations; enthusiastically support murderers & rapists if they'll help you get revenge on the usurpers
OR embrace your new diaspora home & make extraordinary contributions to its art, culture, science.
Obviously, this is not a choice you can make as an individual. History, culture, politics, perhaps even genetics, will nudge people in one direction or the other. World events are contingent; history can turn on a dime. I'm just saying, there are two alternatives.
Through no merit of my own whatsoever, I was born into a group took the latter path and it led to their extraordinary flourishing.
A gracious explanation, but wrongheaded in 4 respects. Thread. (1) The idea that we need a strong welfare state to combat economic equality & that we should use people's economic status, not their skin colour when deciding who needs that help: that is NOT "right-wing." 1/
The idea that we cannot have a multicultural (by which I think he means multiethnic) society without positive discrimination, quotas, identity politics & race consciousness is wrong. In fact, such things mitigate against multicultural harmony. 2/
The idea that you only have two options in dealing with employees: fire them or cave to their demands seems wrong. It should be possible to allow employees free speech but sometimes to say, "OK, your comments are noted, but I disagree." 3/