aerdil posted:lol if u think 34 year olds are capable of making rational decisions, age of consent should be at least 50
coke is melting your mind
roseweird posted:acephalousuniverse posted:that was mostly directed at roseweidrddr
roseweird posted:Agnus_Dei posted:
Oh no, consenting adults getting married
really, think about this carefully
i'm not discussing consent, pretty dismissive to bring up "age of consent" as though my oblique comment had been a call for zizek to be brought up on molestation charges. i wanted to encourage agnus dei and anyone who agrees with him to think of this beyond such simple terms as "consent" and "marriage". there is no need for hyperbole in this discourse. we need to be able to talk about power and sexuality without reducing the discussion to zero sum questions of consent and justice. why is consent given when it is given, if it ever really has been? every party involved has agency, but this doesn't mean we can't talk about what their choices mean.
why do people announce marriages, anyway? why do they publish pictures of their weddings? (why do people talk about them on the internet?) i just want you to consider whether the character, moral, aesthetic, and otherwise, of public intellectuals might matter in some way. what is the meaning of an extremely popular leftist intellectual publishing himself dressed haphazardly, slobbily grabbing at the hips of a woman half his age, who has apparently taken the occasion of their wedding a little more seriously than he has, and gone to some effort to look respectable? seems half of you gentlemen can't even get through a page of this thread without comparing the quality of his various wives, subjecting them to obscene scrutiny ("neck mole constellation"?), and luridly alluding to zizek fucking them in humiliating ways. imo you all have some thinking to do.
i don't actually think he ejaculates broken phonemes and spittle from his urethra, if it's any consolation. i also don't actually think his hatred of gypsies is necessarily sexually cathected, but i'm not ruling it out.
roseweird posted:acephalousuniverse posted:that was mostly directed at roseweidrddr
roseweird posted:Agnus_Dei posted:
Oh no, consenting adults getting married
really, think about this carefully
i'm not discussing consent, pretty dismissive to bring up "age of consent" as though my oblique comment had been a call for zizek to be brought up on molestation charges. i wanted to encourage agnus dei and anyone who agrees with him to think of this beyond such simple terms as "consent" and "marriage". there is no need for hyperbole in this discourse. we need to be able to talk about power and sexuality without reducing the discussion to zero sum questions of consent and justice. why is consent given when it is given, if it ever really has been? every party involved has agency, but this doesn't mean we can't talk about what their choices mean.
why do people announce marriages, anyway? why do they publish pictures of their weddings? (why do people talk about them on the internet?) i just want you to consider whether the character, moral, aesthetic, and otherwise, of public intellectuals might matter in some way. what is the meaning of an extremely popular leftist intellectual publishing himself dressed haphazardly, slobbily grabbing at the hips of a woman half his age, who has apparently taken the occasion of their wedding a little more seriously than he has, and gone to some effort to look respectable? seems half of you gentlemen can't even get through a page of this thread without comparing the quality of his various wives, subjecting them to obscene scrutiny ("neck mole constellation"?), and luridly alluding to zizek fucking them in humiliating ways. imo you all have some thinking to do.
the man is a slovenian. you think he would buy a dress shirt for his wedding when he was only told he had to buy a suit? lmao, if you visit a slovenian and ask for tap water, by the third glass he's going to start grimacing.
aerdil posted:lol if u think 34 year olds are capable of making rational decisions, age of consent should be at least 50
remember when goons used to have this whole math formula worked out? it was like "your age/2 + 7" or something.
so if you were 20 it was okay to have sex w/ a 17 year old according to that methodology.
babyhueypnewton posted:Judith Butler is a revolutionary lesbian dont worry.
i knew this but that post got my hopes up 
gyrofry posted:nobody complains about judith butler's 20 year old boytoy
because they're pretty goddamned sweet. i saw them at maryland deathfest last year opening for bloodnun and satan's jeep/dodge/kia dealership
rumor has it they're doing a split 7" with gruntruck
HenryKrinkle posted:remember when goons used to have this whole math formula worked out? it was like "your age/2 + 7" or something.
so if you were 20 it was okay to have sex w/ a 17 year old according to that methodology.
techically it is in 39 states
Edited by peepaw ()
roseweird posted:acephalousuniverse posted:that was mostly directed at roseweidrddr
roseweird posted:Agnus_Dei posted:
Oh no, consenting adults getting married
really, think about this carefully
i'm not discussing consent, pretty dismissive to bring up "age of consent" as though my oblique comment had been a call for zizek to be brought up on molestation charges. i wanted to encourage agnus dei and anyone who agrees with him to think of this beyond such simple terms as "consent" and "marriage". there is no need for hyperbole in this discourse. we need to be able to talk about power and sexuality without reducing the discussion to zero sum questions of consent and justice. why is consent given when it is given, if it ever really has been? every party involved has agency, but this doesn't mean we can't talk about what their choices mean.
why do people announce marriages, anyway? why do they publish pictures of their weddings? (why do people talk about them on the internet?) i just want you to consider whether the character, moral, aesthetic, and otherwise, of public intellectuals might matter in some way. what is the meaning of an extremely popular leftist intellectual publishing himself dressed haphazardly, slobbily grabbing at the hips of a woman half his age, who has apparently taken the occasion of their wedding a little more seriously than he has, and gone to some effort to look respectable? seems half of you gentlemen can't even get through a page of this thread without comparing the quality of his various wives, subjecting them to obscene scrutiny ("neck mole constellation"?), and luridly alluding to zizek fucking them in humiliating ways. imo you all have some thinking to do.
who cares
- kurt d. love-cobain
roseweird posted:sometimes the heart wants a steady succession of young brides rigorously trained in the heart's own favorite academic orthodoxy
the patriarchal part of me says good on him. the moral side of me doesn't care. the social side of me tells me he's too old to give a fuck what anybody things.
Q: I’ve seen those photos. For someone who describes love as violent and unnecessary, you seem to have pulled off quite the affair. Your wife [Argentinian model Analia Hounie] wore a long white dress and held a bouquet. How traditional!
Z: Yes, but did you notice something? If you look at the photos, you can see that I am not happy. Even my eyes are closed. It’s a psychotic escape. This is not happening. I’m not really here.
I planted some jokes in my wedding. Like, the organizers asked me to select music. So when I approached wife at the ceremony, they played the second movement from Shostakovich’s 10th Symphony, which is usually known as the “portrait of Stalin.” And then when we embraced, the music that they played was Schubert’s “Death and the Maiden.” I enjoyed this in a childish way! But marriage was all a nightmare and so on and so on.
Q: So you did it for your wife, this big wedding?
Z: Yes, she was dreaming about it.
You know what book I really didn’t like from this perspective? Laura Kipnis’ “Against Love.” Her idea is that the last defense of the bourgeois order is ‘No sex outside love!’ It’s the Judith Butler stuff: reconstruction, identity, blah, blah, blah.
I claim it’s just the opposite. Today, passionate engagement is considered almost pathological. I think there is something subversive in saying: This is the man or woman with whom I want to stake everything.
This is why I was never able to do so-called one-night stands. It has to at least have a perspective of eternity.
Q: You seem to hold up [feminist philosopher] Judith Butler as a kind of antithesis. You’ve mentioned her several times already. She’s your straw woman!
Z: Yes, but personally we have great relations! Judith once told me: “Slavoj, you must think I’m a mean woman.” I said: “No, when somebody likes Hegel like you, you cannot be a total idiot!”
HenryKrinkle posted:aerdil posted:lol if u think 34 year olds are capable of making rational decisions, age of consent should be at least 50
remember when goons used to have this whole math formula worked out? it was like "your age/2 + 7" or something.
so if you were 20 it was okay to have sex w/ a 17 year old according to that methodology.
it's the honorable elijah muhammad's formula and if you refer to the fruit of islam as goons then you deserve your iniquitous bleached state, cracker
peepaw posted:gyrofry posted:nobody complains about judith butler's 20 year old boytoy
because they're pretty goddamned sweet. i saw them at maryland deathfest last year opening for bloodnun and satan's jeep/dodge/kia dealership
rumor has it they're doing a split 7" with gruntruck
HenryKrinkle posted:remember when goons used to have this whole math formula worked out? it was like "your age/2 + 7" or something.
so if you were 20 it was okay to have sex w/ a 17 year old according to that methodology.
techically it is in 39 states
its legal in most countries, and legality ultimately being the same as morality i think its high time the local ladies college relaxed enforcement of that court order
MadMedico posted:A famous man married a woman 2 or 3 decades younger than him? Egads I've never heard of such depravity!
just think, if it were justin bieber marrying someone 30 years younger than him, these hypocrites would probably be congratulating him for inventing time travel. typical leftist mentality.
roseweird posted:lol yeah, you get it. you Know. but you're still goign to feel so sleazy and guilty when you quit stimulants
not gonna happen
corey posted:iit's going to be real hard to take zizek seriously, after this
I claim it's just the opposite
aerdil posted:lol if u think 34 year olds are capable of making rational decisions, age of consent should be at least 50
im 31 now. if i wind up married in 3 years, somebody please call the police
corey posted:iit's going to be real hard to take zizek seriously, after this
nobody beats the ziz
wow i can really see how he pulled off that feat now, the ole spicy handshake
getfiscal posted:do you think he's a goon?
an unkempt beardo contrarian? unlikely