Not to be too aggressive in interpreting language, but it's interesting that you wanted to couch erotic materials as being potentially uncouth but not the phrase "different standards." I don't think anyone is arguing that you have to find any particular person attractive, or even any particular image or simulation or simulacrum of a person to be attractive. However, we can recognize that a person's sexual desires are shaped not just by their genetics but by the conditions of their socialization and the development of their psychology. So as materialists, we can observe that the presentation of sexual media that exaggerates what normal human beings in a society look like, by an atomized process of producing that which is most immediately hedonic to consume, has at least some impact on how people go about pursuing real sexual relationships and who with.
Which is to say that your ideas of standards and "physical repulsion" are dependent on a wide variety of factors, the most predominate and structural of which outside of genetics are those created by capitalism. We're talking about people whose sexual experience is so online that they don't have any interest in pursuing any person around them.
yes i directly acknowledge this when i said I'm carrying the garbage that was handed to me by society.
that doesn't change the part where none of us are interested in people we aren't attracted to, regardless of the contingent beauty/wanting-sex-with standards we develop and whether those are aligned with the prevailing culture or not.
That's all fine, I was just trying to answer the initial question: is it truly a cock block if the dude isn't interested in someone in the first place. And I'm answering that I think yeah, if someone wants to fuck in general, but refuses to even pursue potential partners because they have become unable to be aroused by anything but the sign and nothing real, then yeah, that's like def a self cock block, or at least capitalism fucking people up in a way that makes it hard for them to do anything humanly normal, which is certainly also true. You can disagree with me, I just thought it was an interesting question to try and look at.
in my cultural context a cock block is when somebody is trying to hook up with someone and a third party (or, more loosely, event etc e.g. "I was going to go see your dad but that tornado warning cock blocked me") and I think that trying after someone specific in the first place is a necessary component in a way that "health class birth videos traumatized me so i'm not interested in hooking up with your mom" wouldn't qualify because the initial interest was never there.
if your understanding of the term is different then this has been an uninteresting linguistic disagreement instead of a mildly interesting philosophy thing. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Not to be too aggressive in interpreting language, but it's interesting that you wanted to couch erotic materials as being potentially uncouth but not the phrase "different standards." I don't think anyone is arguing that you have to find any particular person attractive, or even any particular image or simulation or simulacrum of a person to be attractive. However, we can recognize that a person's sexual desires are shaped not just by their genetics but by the conditions of their socialization and the development of their psychology. So as materialists, we can observe that the presentation of sexual media that exaggerates what normal human beings in a society look like, by an atomized process of producing that which is most immediately hedonic to consume, has at least some impact on how people go about pursuing real sexual relationships and who with.
Which is to say that your ideas of standards and "physical repulsion" are dependent on a wide variety of factors, the most predominate and structural of which outside of genetics are those created by capitalism. We're talking about people whose sexual experience is so online that they don't have any interest in pursuing any person around them.
yes i directly acknowledge this when i said I'm carrying the garbage that was handed to me by society.
that doesn't change the part where none of us are interested in people we aren't attracted to, regardless of the contingent beauty/wanting-sex-with standards we develop and whether those are aligned with the prevailing culture or not.
That's all fine, I was just trying to answer the initial question: is it truly a cock block if the dude isn't interested in someone in the first place. And I'm answering that I think yeah, if someone wants to fuck in general, but refuses to even pursue potential partners because they have become unable to be aroused by anything but the sign and nothing real, then yeah, that's like def a self cock block, or at least capitalism fucking people up in a way that makes it hard for them to do anything humanly normal, which is certainly also true. You can disagree with me, I just thought it was an interesting question to try and look at.
in my cultural context a cock block is when somebody is trying to hook up with someone and a third party (or, more loosely, event etc e.g. "I was going to go see your dad but that tornado warning cock blocked me") and I think that trying after someone specific in the first place is a necessary component in a way that "health class birth videos traumatized me so i'm not interested in hooking up with your mom" wouldn't qualify because the initial interest was never there.
if your understanding of the term is different then this has been an uninteresting linguistic disagreement instead of a mildly interesting philosophy thing. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯