He describes the subject as "a progressive approach to romance and attraction," not about "advice about getting laid." Are you really saying that men using leftist spaces to creep on women is outside the remit?
Replies
In any case, I *vigorously* reject the framing that any time we're discussing the topic of men getting laid, it's obvious that the presumptively appropriate centering is on men
aug 2, 2025, 1:50 am • 4 0 • view
I don't quite follow this (but again, I absolutely agree with what you said originally). But yeah, I understand the "I hadn't seen the first skeet" thing; that makes a lot more sense. I thought that's what you had reply quoted; if I'm wrong on that then I apologise for the confusion.
aug 2, 2025, 1:56 am • 0 0 • view
Why, if we're talking about "a progressive approach to romance and attraction" as Dunt claims he is, should I presume that the conversation is limited to men's experiences within that sphere?
aug 2, 2025, 1:58 am • 1 0 • view
Well because that's what the article is about (or, more specifically, to teenage boys experiences within that sphere). But as I say, I take the point that you wouldn't know that unless you'd read the threaded skeet with the link to it, actually clicked on it and read it.
aug 2, 2025, 2:05 am • 0 0 • view
I think the writer made exactly the default presumption I'm challenging here -- that everyone would understand that when we talk about romance, attraction, masculinity, and men getting laid, we obviously only mean *men's* experiences and perspectives on that topic unless we say otherwise.
aug 2, 2025, 2:12 am • 3 0 • view
And I think that unexamined presumption is what is leading to the unexpected pushback he's getting, and why his instinctive reaction -- and yours -- is that people are being unfair by not obliging him by narrowing their explicit context to match his implicit context.
aug 2, 2025, 2:14 am • 2 0 • view
I think it's perhaps more not being wise to the fact that a single post of three can go viral and in doing so lose vital context. Which, in fairness, is exactly the same mistake I made - assuming three posts I had read as a triptych would always be read as such and so the context of each preserved.
aug 2, 2025, 2:18 am • 0 0 • view
I don't think so. Read his three skeets again and tell me where he explicitly says that he's focusing on men's experiences within these topics and the advice given to them.
aug 2, 2025, 2:21 am • 2 0 • view
Which isn't really surprising. I mean, nobody expect to glean the full nuance of an entire think piece from the headline or opening precis para. But if that's all you have to go on then yes, I understand that that's all you have to go on.
aug 2, 2025, 2:32 am • 0 0 • view
Regardless, it's gone 3.30AM in the UK so I'm gonna crash. Thank you for the discussion and taking the time. It's appreciated :)
aug 2, 2025, 2:36 am • 1 0 • view
They're an advert though. You're then meant to read the article and it's literally about teen boys etc. I don't think it's so much an underlying presumption as just benefiting from the context of the article If you've read it you'll understand. If not, then you may well not.
aug 2, 2025, 2:30 am • 0 0 • view