This is the real reason that age gaps are so common, the older the person the more likely they are to have amassed a bunch of wealth. Once you have a ton of capital you can subtly coerce people around you and get a poorer partner very easily, who becomes dependent on the older partner and under their economic control.
You can’t really claim to be a communist and be fine with rich old fucks dating teenage models on a society wide scale. One off cases could be genuine attraction or love, large portions of the population shows a systemic economic coercion and distribution of sex up to the older generations using their capital accumulation
and the lord of the maner wasn't a have and the peasant wasn't a have not?
this is the same feudal bullcrap the aristocracy have used to justify the use of and disposal of young poor women forever. a much older man leveraging his wealth, influence, and power into a sexual relationship with a woman young enough that the average person his age would refer to her as a kid is messed up
It’s a Libertarian/Liberal ideology to believe that consent in transactions is discrete and that there’s no such thing as partial consent via coercion.
Liberal/Libertarians would argue that an unfair low wage employment is fine because the worker agreed to do it so they shouldn’t complain. They have often argued that people could sell themselves into slavery if they consented to it.
We know that it’s not that simple and that power, economic and social, is very important to any transaction and who benefits from it.
To a Liberal, every deal is a square deal - proved by the fact that all parties agreed to it. They cannot conceive of an oblong deal that benefits one party far more or even harms someone who is pressured into it
Liberalism. Consent is not discrete, this does not take into account economic factors, power dynamics, pressure and subtler forms of coercion.
A worker “consents” to a low wage and shitty conditions of exploitation. That doesn’t make it free of exploitation. A poor young model might “consent” to sleeping with a modeling agent or executive to get some money, that doesn’t make it free of sexual coercion.
A problem easily solved by specific types of economic equality.
This is the real reason that age gaps are so common, the older the person the more likely they are to have amassed a bunch of wealth. Once you have a ton of capital you can subtly coerce people around you and get a poorer partner very easily, who becomes dependent on the older partner and under their economic control.
You can’t really claim to be a communist and be fine with rich old fucks dating teenage models on a society wide scale. One off cases could be genuine attraction or love, large portions of the population shows a systemic economic coercion and distribution of sex up to the older generations using their capital accumulation
Think of it this way: after he dies, which will be soon, she inherits his wealth and is still young enough to enjoy it.
and if a peasant was impregnated by the lord of the manor feudal custom demanded he pay for the childs education and secure them a career or marriage.
This was also a bad system
It's not about the lord of the manor, it's about intergenerational wealth transfer from the haves to the have-nots, from men to women.
and the lord of the maner wasn't a have and the peasant wasn't a have not?
this is the same feudal bullcrap the aristocracy have used to justify the use of and disposal of young poor women forever. a much older man leveraging his wealth, influence, and power into a sexual relationship with a woman young enough that the average person his age would refer to her as a kid is messed up
The woman didn't inherit the lord's wealth
Please try to read what I wrote instead of what you thought I wrote
she won't inherit his wealth either. That is just not how our inheritance laws work
She in many ways is worse of than the peasant in my analogy who had things guaranteed by right
And even if she did inherit something it’s still fucking wrong for old dudes to be getting fucked by young women for cash.
I think this point deserves clarification. Sex workers should not be criminalised and are not doing anything wrong
but I am not convinced that people can consent to sex if not consenting means they don't get paid money they need to live and or loose their job.
alienation from labor is bad enough but alienation from your ability to sexually consent is worse
a site which really helped inform my position on this issue
If they are just dating, don’t share children & she’s not in his will then she doesn’t get anything
also he's 50 he isn't likely to die soon
deleted by creator
It’s a Libertarian/Liberal ideology to believe that consent in transactions is discrete and that there’s no such thing as partial consent via coercion.
Liberal/Libertarians would argue that an unfair low wage employment is fine because the worker agreed to do it so they shouldn’t complain. They have often argued that people could sell themselves into slavery if they consented to it.
We know that it’s not that simple and that power, economic and social, is very important to any transaction and who benefits from it.
To a Liberal, every deal is a square deal - proved by the fact that all parties agreed to it. They cannot conceive of an oblong deal that benefits one party far more or even harms someone who is pressured into it
deleted by creator
Even in a communist society it should still be okay between consenting adults. At least that's my own view.
Adult is a very broad category
after we solve the current big problem of capital accumulation we can hash out the details
Liberalism. Consent is not discrete, this does not take into account economic factors, power dynamics, pressure and subtler forms of coercion.
A worker “consents” to a low wage and shitty conditions of exploitation. That doesn’t make it free of exploitation. A poor young model might “consent” to sleeping with a modeling agent or executive to get some money, that doesn’t make it free of sexual coercion.