Well, yeah, but that’s the point. It’s “I’m not into that”, as opposed to “I wouldn’t date X type of people”. The point is you can not be into things without it being a political statement. Even if your political line of choice tends to favor a particular aesthetic.
You lost me there. Aesthetic? Maybe a statement of preference in a certain context like a public forum on an unrelated subject, yes, can be a political statement, but the preference itself is completely apolitical in nature, IMO. This isn’t art, it’s just a matter of whether you’re into something or not sexually, which is usually something that comes before a political viewpoint, or any conscious thought for that matter.
Hah. I guess I lost you because I never quite made the jump into buying the notion of considering the way they look or act as an identitarian problem. This is a trend across the political divide, from fashy complaints about people with “blue hair” to progressives challenging gender stereotypes. Seems to me like a problem of aesthetics, all of it, but people have associated those aesthetics to political positions, when not with their mutual perception of their fundamental identities.
Which of those forms of expression floats your boat… you know, biologically, is entirely up to you and your natural reactions. Dress, hair, lack of hair, sexual practices, participation of specific varieties of genitalia… I don’t care, it’s all some interaction of how you decorate yourself and which decorations get you going.
But I’m in the minority there. It’s clearly important to society and it can have a deep impact on individuals and their wellbeing. And like anything relevant to society it’s been politicized. Because we’re all just horny apes in the end.
Well, yeah, but that’s the point. It’s “I’m not into that”, as opposed to “I wouldn’t date X type of people”. The point is you can not be into things without it being a political statement. Even if your political line of choice tends to favor a particular aesthetic.
You lost me there. Aesthetic? Maybe a statement of preference in a certain context like a public forum on an unrelated subject, yes, can be a political statement, but the preference itself is completely apolitical in nature, IMO. This isn’t art, it’s just a matter of whether you’re into something or not sexually, which is usually something that comes before a political viewpoint, or any conscious thought for that matter.
Hah. I guess I lost you because I never quite made the jump into buying the notion of considering the way they look or act as an identitarian problem. This is a trend across the political divide, from fashy complaints about people with “blue hair” to progressives challenging gender stereotypes. Seems to me like a problem of aesthetics, all of it, but people have associated those aesthetics to political positions, when not with their mutual perception of their fundamental identities.
Which of those forms of expression floats your boat… you know, biologically, is entirely up to you and your natural reactions. Dress, hair, lack of hair, sexual practices, participation of specific varieties of genitalia… I don’t care, it’s all some interaction of how you decorate yourself and which decorations get you going.
But I’m in the minority there. It’s clearly important to society and it can have a deep impact on individuals and their wellbeing. And like anything relevant to society it’s been politicized. Because we’re all just horny apes in the end.