When I saw you were in the debate, I thought: Gee, I wonder which side she is on? So, yeah - you will lose because you already have lots of sympathy for their side. But you will lose with distinction, grace and intellectual clarity, I am quite sure!
I think you have a 30% chance of winning. This is partly because Louise Perry is very good (I don’t know Khachiyan), and partly because I think the sexual revolution has pretty clearly failed women (on average), and there has probably not been much of a net benefit even for men. My sense is that the strand of feminism that backed the sexual revolution saw equality as ‘being like men’ and didn’t adequately account for differences of preferences.
Hmm . . . I'm assuming the discussion is about the consequences (current status) as opposed to the event which is roughly bounded by the 60s and 70s. In broad terms the "revolution" succeeded insomuch that it drove a lot of change.
Meaning, I'm unclear about the topic of the debate, or even how one would "win it". What would winning the debate entail?
Do women (and men, for that matter) need to be told how to feel about it? Surely, there is no one answer applicable to everyone.
Louise makes a compelling case...I wouldn't like to be going up against her.
Though there has to be a happy medium between valium and Magdalen laundries on one hand and SSRI's and WAP on the other. Maybe it's a simple numbers game? In which case, yes the sexual revolution has failed, women's self reported happiness has declined over the decades, and less children are being born.
It seems that we're mixing up sexual agency for women and the hypersexualisation of society and calling it all the Sexual Revolution. If we could untangle those two strands we'd have a clearer view.
I'm exceedingly confident in your clarity of thought, but that doesn't necessarily translate to winning debates, which are another beast entirely. Either way, I hope you enjoy yourself.
You could win on an intellectual level, but you probably won't because you sympathize too much with Louise Perry. Based on what I've seen of your podcast and Twitter, your personal attitude is "trad" enough you won't really be able to argue as passionately as she will. Anna Khachiyan is good at turning clever phrases in service of whatever ideology she's currently capering for. Grimes is a singer who had a baby with Elon Musk. The points Perry makes are far from unassailable, but she's really popular right now because there's clearly a lot of women who would like to sidestep any responsibility for their own choices even though the sexual revolution was clearly driven by women. Gay men are the only people in the world who like and sympathize with men more than women, so it's tough to persuade anybody that whatever dumb thing passes as feminism currently isn't a good thing, even when it's clearly impossible to parse from a logical perspective. So Perry can simultaneously lament women being infantilised when it threatens a privilege she wants, while arguing in favor of assuming women can't be expected to actually know what they want when it's something she doesn't like. Good luck, though.
I think while Louise Perry makes a compelling case, I think that she severely underestimates a woman’s desire for sexual union and capacity for pleasure beyond that of men. This eros is ignited at an older age compared with men. My experience is that once a woman is in a secure trusting relationship with a partner and she removes some of the brakes on sexual intimacy (STI, reproduction, body shame) and she is comfortable with herself, her sexual appetite often exceeds her partner’s. The desire to be lusted by her partner is immense, and it seems that Perry doesn’t face that pesky fact. Only women are multi-orgasmic and can have different types of orgasms and have an organ whose sole purpose is pleasure; these facts are not invented by men, but seem to be unique to woman. While it is true that the sexual revolution may have failed woman in many ways, it is also true that Ms. Perry doesn’t seem to take women’s sexuality seriously.
I mean, failed to do what? Women have incomparably greater freedoms compared to what they would have had without the sexual revolution. Would some women in 2023 be happier if they chose not to take advantage of some of those freedoms? Sure, but that's not the point.
Jews who fled Iran for Israel after living as second class citizens (due to being Jews) for a long, long time in Iran. I don't know if woke Americans realize that 60% of Israel's population are Jews from the Middle East and North Africa with the same story. It makes me want to scream. And I am aware that the Israeli government is corrupt, I have no rose tinted glasses about any of these guys. I definitely do not want any Palestinian harmed. I wish for them to have their own beautiful state. I would even love to live together, but HOW with Hamas?! It just blows my mind. To see people celebrate RIGHT after the massacre by Hamas activated any and all Jewish trauma I have. Your podcast episode made me feel sane.
Comment on feminism. It is instructive to compare how women have done in these two sports; gymnastics and basketball. Gymnastics stands out as a sport where the women get a lot more exposure and sponsorship opportunities than men. The reason is that sexy, petite girls in tights, getting all teary eyed has much more entertainment value than a bunch of guys going through their routines. The two most famous women in gymnastics are Simone Biles and Nadia Comenici. The two most well known men are?? Who can even name them, right?
Now onto basketball. When the WNBA peaked in attendance around 1998, the average was close to 11,000 people per game. Now it is down to around 7,000 per game. If you consider how much the U.S. population has increased since 1998, it is pretty pathetic. The WNBA loses money and must be subsidized by the men.
My point is, don't debate abstractions; just take a look at real world situations and draw your own conclusions.
Sarah, if I want to send you a book, how do I do that?
When I saw you were in the debate, I thought: Gee, I wonder which side she is on? So, yeah - you will lose because you already have lots of sympathy for their side. But you will lose with distinction, grace and intellectual clarity, I am quite sure!
I think you have a 30% chance of winning. This is partly because Louise Perry is very good (I don’t know Khachiyan), and partly because I think the sexual revolution has pretty clearly failed women (on average), and there has probably not been much of a net benefit even for men. My sense is that the strand of feminism that backed the sexual revolution saw equality as ‘being like men’ and didn’t adequately account for differences of preferences.
Hmm . . . I'm assuming the discussion is about the consequences (current status) as opposed to the event which is roughly bounded by the 60s and 70s. In broad terms the "revolution" succeeded insomuch that it drove a lot of change.
Meaning, I'm unclear about the topic of the debate, or even how one would "win it". What would winning the debate entail?
Do women (and men, for that matter) need to be told how to feel about it? Surely, there is no one answer applicable to everyone.
Anyway, good luck and hope it's fun.
i am concerned you will agree with louise too much tbh.
Louise makes a compelling case...I wouldn't like to be going up against her.
Though there has to be a happy medium between valium and Magdalen laundries on one hand and SSRI's and WAP on the other. Maybe it's a simple numbers game? In which case, yes the sexual revolution has failed, women's self reported happiness has declined over the decades, and less children are being born.
It seems that we're mixing up sexual agency for women and the hypersexualisation of society and calling it all the Sexual Revolution. If we could untangle those two strands we'd have a clearer view.
I'm exceedingly confident in your clarity of thought, but that doesn't necessarily translate to winning debates, which are another beast entirely. Either way, I hope you enjoy yourself.
Will it be recorded for a podcast?
Is winning a debate even a thing?
You could win on an intellectual level, but you probably won't because you sympathize too much with Louise Perry. Based on what I've seen of your podcast and Twitter, your personal attitude is "trad" enough you won't really be able to argue as passionately as she will. Anna Khachiyan is good at turning clever phrases in service of whatever ideology she's currently capering for. Grimes is a singer who had a baby with Elon Musk. The points Perry makes are far from unassailable, but she's really popular right now because there's clearly a lot of women who would like to sidestep any responsibility for their own choices even though the sexual revolution was clearly driven by women. Gay men are the only people in the world who like and sympathize with men more than women, so it's tough to persuade anybody that whatever dumb thing passes as feminism currently isn't a good thing, even when it's clearly impossible to parse from a logical perspective. So Perry can simultaneously lament women being infantilised when it threatens a privilege she wants, while arguing in favor of assuming women can't be expected to actually know what they want when it's something she doesn't like. Good luck, though.
I think while Louise Perry makes a compelling case, I think that she severely underestimates a woman’s desire for sexual union and capacity for pleasure beyond that of men. This eros is ignited at an older age compared with men. My experience is that once a woman is in a secure trusting relationship with a partner and she removes some of the brakes on sexual intimacy (STI, reproduction, body shame) and she is comfortable with herself, her sexual appetite often exceeds her partner’s. The desire to be lusted by her partner is immense, and it seems that Perry doesn’t face that pesky fact. Only women are multi-orgasmic and can have different types of orgasms and have an organ whose sole purpose is pleasure; these facts are not invented by men, but seem to be unique to woman. While it is true that the sexual revolution may have failed woman in many ways, it is also true that Ms. Perry doesn’t seem to take women’s sexuality seriously.
I mean, failed to do what? Women have incomparably greater freedoms compared to what they would have had without the sexual revolution. Would some women in 2023 be happier if they chose not to take advantage of some of those freedoms? Sure, but that's not the point.
Jews who fled Iran for Israel after living as second class citizens (due to being Jews) for a long, long time in Iran. I don't know if woke Americans realize that 60% of Israel's population are Jews from the Middle East and North Africa with the same story. It makes me want to scream. And I am aware that the Israeli government is corrupt, I have no rose tinted glasses about any of these guys. I definitely do not want any Palestinian harmed. I wish for them to have their own beautiful state. I would even love to live together, but HOW with Hamas?! It just blows my mind. To see people celebrate RIGHT after the massacre by Hamas activated any and all Jewish trauma I have. Your podcast episode made me feel sane.
where can i watch this?
Comment on feminism. It is instructive to compare how women have done in these two sports; gymnastics and basketball. Gymnastics stands out as a sport where the women get a lot more exposure and sponsorship opportunities than men. The reason is that sexy, petite girls in tights, getting all teary eyed has much more entertainment value than a bunch of guys going through their routines. The two most famous women in gymnastics are Simone Biles and Nadia Comenici. The two most well known men are?? Who can even name them, right?
Now onto basketball. When the WNBA peaked in attendance around 1998, the average was close to 11,000 people per game. Now it is down to around 7,000 per game. If you consider how much the U.S. population has increased since 1998, it is pretty pathetic. The WNBA loses money and must be subsidized by the men.
My point is, don't debate abstractions; just take a look at real world situations and draw your own conclusions.
Sarah, if I want to send you a book, how do I do that?
It's unclear to me what the disagreement would be tbh. It seems that your views don't differ very much with those of Louise.
Win or loose, Im sure it Will be good inquiry.