I am thinking of the mindset of wanting to hook up with as many people as possible not taking into consideration other people ‘s feelings or who might get hurt in by the process, which objectifies other individuals. That is an individualistic thought process, right?
Edit: I meant commodification in the sense of online dating apps, escort services, only fans, porn, prostitution and patriarchy. This trickles to the culture due to base and superstructure, and it is adopted by individualism.
I don't see how hooking up with other people would mean that one doesn't consider other people's feelings. If two people wanna hook up, what's the harm? And why would that mean that they "objectify" each other?
And what does individualism have to do with "objectifying" other people anyway?
The act of hooking up reduces other people to sex objects to satisfy’s one needs. One is not trying to make a connection with other humans by hooking up or trying to make a community by hooking up. One is only trying to get rid of sexual urges and seeing other individuals as a medium for that. As another comment mentioned that is atomization and individualistic.
Well, a long time relationship serves to satisfy one's need for companionship, a hook up satisfies one's need for sex. Both are mutually beneficial agreements between consenting parties (which btw do nothing for society as a whole, so I don't see why relationships would be any less individualistic than hookups).
Recognizing other people can satisfy our needs is not "objectifying" them, as long as we consider their needs as well. "Objectifying" others would be to disregard their needs and to view them only as means to your own needs.
I think your view of hookups is weird. Why would a hookup mean that I regard my partner as any less of a human than if we were to go into a relationship? You are trying to make a connection when hooking up. Its just that this connection is a mostly physical one, rather than emotional.
And honestly I don't understand what you mean with "trying to make a community". When I go into a relationship I'm not trying to do that either, and I don't see why monogamous relationships would be required for communities. Bonobos, some of the most social animals with extremely strong communities have no concept of monogamy, they have sex with different partners all the time. Why would hookups not allow for strong communities?
a long time relationship serves to satisfy one's need for companionship
This is very reductive. A long-term relationship is not just that, at least a non-toxic one. Long-term relationships require making sacrifices for the other person and thinking of another individual’s needs outside your own.
a hook up satisfies one's need for sex.
Yes, that is all it is. It is the individualistic act of using another person to get a physical release from them. I would say that is more of a desire for sex rather than a need for sex. People dont die of lack of sex.
Both are mutually beneficial agreements between consenting parties
I dont see how the alienation of bonds between humans and the reduction of other individuals to be a physical release is beneficial for anyone. If anything saying that people benefit of such alienation and lack commitment is individualistic, and saying that they consented to that when capitalism doesn’t give many people other options to connect with other by privatizing all communal spaces, is a very liberal way of thinking.
Recognizing other people can satisfy our needs is not "objectifying" them, as long as we consider their needs as well.
Isn’t it though? As mentioned before hook ups are just a way to meet someone’s desire for sex. That is the only requirement for hookups. The prime directive is to meet that desire. Therefore, the other person is just a means to an end, an object to release that desire. Their humanity is pointless in that state. Their role is just to quench the sexual desire of another.
"Objectifying" others would be to disregard their needs and to view them only as means to your own needs.
But that is literally what a hookup is. Is a no strings attach means to an end where someone desires for sex gets met. It doesn’t matter what happens after or if someone might catch feelings for the other and gets hurt afterwards or if one person is doing as revenge sex for someone else or any reason that might cause hurt to any of the parties. It is an individualistic act where the other person becomes an object for sexual gratification of another without any of the sacrifices of commitment that would come from a relationship with such individual.
I think your view of hookups is weird.
Whatever you say bro
Why would a hookup mean that I regard my partner as any less of a human than if we were to go into a relationship?
Because the nature of hookup is just to use someone as a release for a desire without actually making a bond with that person; therefore that is a disregard for their humanity. Also, someone that someone hooks up is not a partner.
You are trying to make a connection when hooking up. Its just that this connection is a mostly physical one, rather than emotional.
That is not really a connection, but a way of release. Since we agreed that hookups are just a way to satisfy sexual desire, saying that doing this is a connection is like saying that paying an escort is also having a physical connection. It makes no sense.
And honestly I don't understand what you mean with "trying to make a community". When I go into a relationship I'm not trying to do that either, and I don't see why monogamous relationships would be required for communities.
I am not talking about monogamy here, but of hook up culture. Relationships help build communities because it creates families that when join together creates communities. No communities are created around hookups since the nature of hookups are hit it and quit it. It is the antithesis of community.
Bonobos, some of the most social animals with extremely strong communities have no concept of monogamy, they have sex with different partners all the time. Why would hookups not allow for strong communities?
Again, hookup culture and monogamy are totally different things, you can be polyamorous and not do hookups. But, lol, bonobos, literally resolve everything through sex. That is all that they do. I don’t think that humans and bonobos equate because we have a legal system and want to achieve more things in life besides just having sex all the time lol.
Every time that a male bonobo gets rowdy, females will just have sex with him to call him down. I don’t think that is something that we should adopt in society. Males always expecting sex to not go rowdy 🤣.
Our closest relatives are chimpanzees and they are rapist psycho killers. I don’t think that we should use other animals to try to create a human society around. That is not dialectical.
I guess we simply had very different experiences with hookups and relationships. I never had the feeling I was being used, and I don't think my partners did either. Hookups let us scratch each others' backs at a time when neither side was willing to go into a relationship, and it was good.
I just don't see why people should go into relationships if they don't want that. Imagine hookups were illegal, people would form dysfunctional pseudo-relationships, build on nothing but the desire for sex. In fact I have seen a few relationships like that, with one side longing for a deeper emotional connection while the other only seemed interested in sex. Why would that be better?
I don't see why the people I have an emotional connection with need to be the same people that I have sex with, or vice versa. I also don't see what would give another person the authority to condemn interactions I had with others, that they themselves have not been involved in in any way, and that didn't hurt anyone.
I don't appreciate someone telling me what my relationships need to look like, and your reasoning that hookups are bad because they don't lead to families honestly reminds me of conservatives condemming homosexual relationships because they won't result in families. Why would families be required for strong communities? If I have strong bonds with friends and family where we help each other out, participate in a union and some kind of sports club, why would that be worse than a couple that never leaves the house and refuses to have children?
And lastly, why does it have to be either hookups or relationships? Many marriages that start early fail, while marriages that start with both partners being 30+ tend to be very stable. Why would I go into a long term relationship at 20, when I hardly know myself, rather than making a bunch of experiences and then setteling down later?
Your entire view of human interaction, relationships and community is just is so extremely foreign to me, and I don't think we will ever agree.
Obviously, you have made very different experiences, and I'm sorry about that. But I do believe that what you experienced is not a problem with hookups. What you are talking about when you talk about hookups sounds more like rape to me.
When I have sex, my partner is not just an object. That's not what sex is, at least to me, you can't just do whatever you want without considering the other. You absolutely do have to take into account the other person's preferences and desires if it is to be a rewarding experience for both.
Since this discussion seems that is going to be endless, I will reply to the main points.
Hookups let us scratch each others' backs at a time when neither side was willing to go into a relationship, and it was good.
Yeah, it is an act devoid of any connection just to satisfy a desire aka getting your back scratched. Same way one could pay an escort to satisfy such desire. One of the parties gets a monetary need met and the other gets a sexual desire met. No matter how you slice it is individualistic and objectifying.
I just don't see why people should go into relationships if they don't want that.
I am not saying that people are forced to get into relationships. I was just doing an analysis of hookups and hookup culture. You keep making this wild leaps and assumptions of my arguments.
Imagine hookups were illegal, people would form dysfunctional pseudo-relationships, build on nothing but the desire for sex. In fact I have seen a few relationships like that, with one side longing for a deeper emotional connection while the other only seemed interested in sex. Why would that be better?
Firstly, on socialism hookups will disappear on their own since people will be able to live communally and there will be more public free spaces and activities for people to actually form connections. Also, the base and superstructure of a system based on dialectical materialism will destroy any ideology that atomizes humans.
Getting back to your point, the existence of toxic relationships is not a validation of hookup culture. Hookup culture exists as a result of capitalist alienation and atomization. The fact that deceitful people get into relationships for the wrong reason doesn’t diminish the fact that relationships are the building blocks of communities. And I don’t mean only romantic relationships, but friendships and camaraderie are relationships as well.
Just because someone has a desire to have sex doesn’t mean that someone needs to objectify someone just for sex. This is a very similar argument of the defenders of prostitution saying that it is okay because “men got needs and women are too picky”. There is such thing as self control.
Hook ups are the antithesis of relationships and community buildings.
I don't see why the people I have an emotional connection with need to be the same people that I have sex with, or vice versa.
The way that you see things is not something that I could change since you probably already have your cognitive biases, like everyone else does. However, it is good to note that the way that you think it is shaped by capitalism due to base and superstructure.
I also don't see what would give another person the authority to condemn interactions I had with others, that they themselves have not been involved in in any way, and that didn't hurt anyone.
Lol, it is funny the way that you make these huge leaps and assumptions of my arguments. I am not telling you the way that you have to live your life. I am giving my analysis on hookup culture and hookups based on some answers that I got here.
I don't appreciate someone telling me what my relationships need to look like
Again this is not what I am doing, and I find it funny how you just get defensive over someone’s analysis of hookups. I never mentioned you or your life in my analysis, I kept a very neutral language.
and your reasoning that hookups are bad because they don't lead to families honestly reminds me of conservatives condemming homosexual relationships because they won't result in families. Why would families be required for strong communities? If I have strong bonds with friends and family where we help each other out, participate in a union and some kind of sports club, why would that be worse than a couple that never leaves the house and refuses to have children?
By families, I didn't mean children. A couple is a family. As I mentioned previously, friends and comrades are relationships as well. I meant that kind of family. Hookups don’t provide that kind of connection due to their individualistic nature.
And lastly, why does it have to be either hookups or relationships? Many marriages that start early fail, while marriages that start with both partners being 30+ tend to be very stable. Why would I go into a long term relationship at 20, when I hardly know myself, rather than making a bunch of experiences and then setteling down later?
Again, I am not telling you how to live your life. I am making an analysis of the individualistic and atomistic nature of hookup culture. You dont have to get married or hookup if you dont want to. What I say is that hookups are individualistic and objectifying, and if you want to do it for whatever reason that is up to you.
Your entire view of human interaction, relationships and community is just is so extremely foreign to me, and I don't think we will ever agree.
This is not relevant to the discussion, but okay 🤷🏽♂️
Obviously, you have made very different experiences, and I'm sorry about that.
Okay… Can you please not patronize me…
But I do believe that what you experienced is not a problem with hookups. What you are talking about when you talk about hookups sounds more like rape to me.
Lol, and again we go with the wild leaps and assumptions 🤣. This do make the convo kind of fun though.
When I have sex, my partner is not just an object. That's not what sex is, at least to me, you can't just do whatever you want without considering the other. You absolutely do have to take into account the other person's preferences and desires if it is to be a rewarding experience for both.
On hookups, one doesnt even need to know the person’s name. One doesn’t need to know what is the person's favorite color, their birthday, or anything about them. This is a way of dehumanization.
A complaint that I hear a lot about hookups is that people are selfish and just want to get off themselves. Women mostly complain about how the guy doesnt really care about her reaching orgasm, but the guy wants to only get off himself.
One can try to make the hookup experience as human as possible but ultimately the individualistic nature of it will devolve on the objectification of the other individual and that is what the hookup culture is filled with, selfish individuals.
It's more closely related to atomization than individualism.
Pre-1950's America was still very individualistic but they also had third spaces and more close knit communities. Without meaningful connection, those who are able to hookup achieve a facsimile of intimacy. Those who aren't able to get that turn to escort services, onlyfans, and patriarchy etc etc. This compounds the problem until society breaks down.
Of course people do have casual sex for just fun just as they did throughout history. But the major shift towards that isn't because people changed their minds suddenly.
What do you mean by “atomization”? I have never heard that term before.
The separating of humans into individual elements, or atoms, such that they're disconnected from each other.
Basically, breaking the social bonds that once held human society together. A community is very strong, a group of individuals with no connection to each other is weak. What union-busting does to the workplace, atomization does to society at large. Individualism is tangential but not quite the same. Individualism is a sort of ideology that things should be this way. They should be self-reliant and depend on themselves etc etc. Atomization is the state being unable to form meaningful social relationships due to isolation.
Of course people do have casual sex for just fun just as they did throughout history. But the major shift towards that isn't because people changed their minds suddenly.
What do you attribute the major shift towards hook-up culture?
Social media and the monetization of every public place is the immediate cause. With social media, you can get a facsimile of easy social interaction. For the few who do go out, there are increasingly few places that you can go without spending money. Add in a bad economy and friends are a luxury that few can afford. It's easier and cheaper to sit at home and use social media, hookup when you need sex, and only go out when you need. Social media is the fast food of social interactions. You know its unhealthy but it's the path of least resistance.
But these trends started much earlier. Social media is just the tool used to create it. I can't explain everything coherently but contributing factors to atomization are cars, the economic downturn after the WWII boom, the loss of the church as an institution, privatization of public spaces, monetization of culture under capitalism, the threat organized communities posed to capitalist projects, etc etc.
Based on what you are saying the culprit seems to be capitalist’s culture of alienation and the privatization of everything including hanging out spaces, which have very expensive prices to do anything communal. The way I see it, social media is just the last thing people can do for free that involves other people. I wouldn't say that social media is to blame, but capitalism is to blame.
Off topic perhaps, but I keep thinking about culture and what the word even means to me, and i keep coming back with the thought that excepting perhaps being bathed in a pervasive, ever-twisting amorphous master-slave morality, as a mayo-american i... Don't even have a culture. Did it die before i was born? If it existed what even was it?
Does anyone have a book or paper talking about what I'm feeling? I really don't know what i'd do a search for
I can relate to that. I'm from the US too, and I just don't get it. I don't feel like I'm part of the culture - any of the things here. If there's a culture here, it's something I don't belong to or don't want to belong to.
There are plenty of cultures in the US, but if you aren't born and raised in them, they just kinda exist as far as being part of one.
That's cause the US has no culture other than stealing from others and white supremacy. Happens when you base your entire existence off settler colonialism, you have no culture but colonialism.
No argument here. It's no wonder most people here look to the cultures of their ancestors.
Why do you feel like hooking up means not taking into consideration other people's feelings or who might get hurt in the process?
Every time I've hooked up there was either a spoken or implicitly obvious unspoken understanding of the situation, e.g. the other person was in an open relationship
The mindset to hook up with as many people as possible just for the sake of bodycount could/would be toxic, but that's rarely the situation, people just enjoy casual sex
The problems begin where communication ends (or expectations outgrow the communication, but that's on the expectee)
The act of hooking up reduces other people to sex objects to satisfy’s one needs. One is not trying to make a connection with other humans by hooking up or trying to make a community by hooking up. One is only trying to get rid of sexual urges and seeing other individuals as a medium for that. As another comment mentioned that is atomization and individualistic.
The act of hooking up reduces other people to sex objects to satisfy’s one needs.
One is only trying to get rid of sexual urges and seeing other individuals as a medium for that.
I mean. It kind of feels like you're trying to invalidate the feeling of being desired as something that is valid. In the proper context, aka consent, being desired by another person is actually fun.
One is not trying to make a connection with other humans by hooking up or trying to make a community by hooking up.
As another comment mentioned that is atomization and individualistic.
I'm not surprised to see this. It's also something I encountered in real life with someone. I just think it's a weird hangup. Like, very short term relationships are still relationships with obligations. I bought a homeless person some food on the street. I did not owe that homeless person anything but I had compassion and care for that person. Same thing for a hookup. Just because it's just sex doesn't mean I'm going treat them as disposable. I think it is itself individualistic to think as something that is short term as disposable and not something that still requires care and compassion.
You really, really cannot throw together dating apps and hook-ups with pornography and prostitution. These are not the same thing.
There's something to be said about atomization of society and others have already kind of said it here with regards to the modern hook-up culture via apps. I think there's something to be said about the dehumanization inherent in swiping through a gallery of people's pictures and picking one out to fuck for the weekend like some other object. It resembles strongly the shopping experience so I suppose I can see something to discuss there, it reduces intimacy in a way to just another form of browsing appearances, labels, and marketing of self (like the shopping aisle it's so busy and so full of options one is incentivized not to spend more than a few seconds, a minute at most on any particular offering before moving on to the one beside it) and this situation is created by the lack of societal bonds and interaction outside of work and school. In a way with pornography culture there's perhaps an intersection there towards the attitudes but I don't feel confident enough to talk about it. As to prostitution and pornography, those are of course without a doubt commodification of the female body and form and cannot exist under communism.
As to prostitution and pornography, those are of course without a doubt commodification of the female body and form and cannot exist under communism.
I file this jointly under:
- There will be demand for this for the foreseeable future, so it's a choice between a black market or some option above board.
- There are 50 more immediate things to address so there's no need for a struggle session over this right now.
As to prostitution and pornography, those are of course without a doubt commodification of the female body and form and cannot exist under communism.
Not sure I agree with the pornography part, depending on how you're defining pornography. That might be the case for paid pornography but I bet even under communism there will be people wanting to show themselves in sexual acts, and perhaps even more so than now as losing their jobs because people saw them online and things like that wouldn't be a problem, unless it was outright made illegal of course.
Also with extra freedoms under communism more and bigger and more inclusive communities about these things could come to exist, perhaps even involving money but not to "pay for people" but to produce content that people want to produce/consume.
Individualism perhaps, but not commodification because hookups don't have commercial value.
I meant commodification in the sense of online dating apps, escort services, only fans, porn, prostitution and patriarchy. This trickles to the culture due to base and superstructure, and it is adopted by individualism.
Hookups that happen through apps and services are being commodified and the commodification of hookups is bad, but it's not "hookup culture" that commodified hookups. It's dating apps and services which are attempting to enclose the commons and turn hookups from just a human activity into a commodity.
But a hookup, as just something people do, is not itself just a commodity. Not yet. People still go out and meet other people for free.
I think calling it objectification is an insult to people who have actually been objectivified and commidified, slaves and other bonded labourers, and that objectification theory is a less robust retelling of the ages old looking-glass self concept. I don't pay the concept much mind
All sex is rape when women are socialized and conditioned by the patiarchy into being hetrosexual breeding machines.
Informed consent doesnt mean much in a neo liberal class system setup by the patriarchy where every structure from birth conditions hetro-normitivity.
So I dont think hook-up culture is part of invidualism per say, but I do think that the commodification of the female body is real.
sounds very infantilizing of women to say they're incapable of consenting
Its applicable to men as well, under capitalist neo-liberal class society true consent is hard to reach.
Its not infantilizing to achknowledge socialization and the partiarchys impact on consent, its just sociology.
its very infantilizing to think people are not capable of making decisions for themselves because they live in a society lmao
I didnt say people are incapable of making decisions for themselves, I talked about informed consent.
informed consent is a medical ethical term. I hope you're not bringing out a piece of paper for your partner to sign before sex lol
No but I am making sure they dont feel any pressure to have sex with me.
