3 ms·

“It's a fact...that in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differen

“It's a fact...that in societies like ours sex truly represents a second system of differentiation, completely independent of money; and as a system of differentiation it functions just as mercilessly. The effects of these two systems are, furthermore, strictly equivalent. Just like unrestrained economic liberalism, and for similar reasons, sexual liberalism produces phenomena of absolute pauperization . Some men make love every day; others five or six times in their life, or never. Some make love with dozens of women; others with none. It's what's known as 'the law of the market'...Economic liberalism is an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society. Sexual liberalism is likewise an extension of the domain of the struggle, its extension to all ages and all classes of society.” ― Michel Houellebecq, Extension du domaine de la lutte

geysersam 4y ago
Good writing, but bad argument. Some things that make those "systems" different: 1. The market domain is much "wider" than sex. Money influences every aspect of your life. 2. The exact same argument could be made about many other "systems of differentiation". Such as skill or physical and mental health. It's a cheap argument to make it seem like socialist arguments against economic inequality also applies to some kind of "sexual inequality". Sounds like an argument that eventually leads to Handmaidens tale, but I could just be imagining things. Fact is that socialism isn't about removing all differences or all unfairness in the world at all cost. It's about constructing a system that limits the negative side effects of the market economy. One aspect of that is to avoid the commercialization of non-economic aspects of life. What Houllebecq describes is the opposite. Love as a commodity.
- kingstoned 4y ago
  I suggest you read this: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/06/comparing-income-sex-redistribution.html https://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/06/comparing-income-sex-...
  - geysersam 4y ago
    I don't understand how you mean that long text addresses the issues raised by me and others. From what I can discern, he makes two counter arguments: 1. Sex is as important as income. 2. Poor income leads to "poor access" to sex. If the income distribution is unfair, so must the resulting sex distribution be. To 1 I can only respond that many people feel differently. Anecdotally, I've never encountered anyone but well off men making the argument. Is that your experience also? For 2: Poor income leads to many unfair situations. Let's cure the problem and not the symptom.

geysersam 4y ago

Good writing, but bad argument. Some things that make those "systems" different: 1. The market domain is much "wider" than sex. Money influences every aspect of your life. 2. The exact same argument could be made about many other "systems of differentiation". Such as skill or physical and mental health. It's a cheap argument to make it seem like socialist arguments against economic inequality also applies to some kind of "sexual inequality". Sounds like an argument that eventually leads to Handmaidens tale, but I could just be imagining things. Fact is that socialism isn't about removing all differences or all unfairness in the world at all cost. It's about constructing a system that limits the negative side effects of the market economy. One aspect of that is to avoid the commercialization of non-economic aspects of life. What Houllebecq describes is the opposite. Love as a commodity.

kingstoned 4y ago
I suggest you read this: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/06/comparing-income-sex-redistribution.html https://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/06/comparing-income-sex-...
- geysersam 4y ago
  I don't understand how you mean that long text addresses the issues raised by me and others. From what I can discern, he makes two counter arguments: 1. Sex is as important as income. 2. Poor income leads to "poor access" to sex. If the income distribution is unfair, so must the resulting sex distribution be. To 1 I can only respond that many people feel differently. Anecdotally, I've never encountered anyone but well off men making the argument. Is that your experience also? For 2: Poor income leads to many unfair situations. Let's cure the problem and not the symptom.