The post contains discussable ideas, if you’re interested in discussing them. I’m happy to dive in with you. Your request for examples makes no sense to me. I defined what I mean by “ownership”, there’s no hidden subtext here. Examples are any case in which a person claims the right to deprive others of a desirable.
By that definition, refusing to have sex with someone is ownership. You might call it self-ownership, but you’ve said a lot of negative things about ownership that don’t really apply to it.
Yes, by that definition, a person has a right to deprive others of sexual access to their body. But that would imply that they are not their body, but that their body is an object they have absolute rights over, like a car. An owner breaks no law by taking their brand-new 2025 AMG GT 63 SE to the wrecking yard and having it crushed. So, then, if we own our bodies, why is suicide frowned on, outlawed, and a sin in many religions?
I happen to find objectifying myself and my body that way to be disgusting, because it’s dehumanizing.
Btw, the post is an invitation to discuss. It’s completely fiine to decline an invitation. But the fact that you responded as you did makes me wonder why you felt you couldn’t just gracefully decline.
Yes, responded as you did. You can’t intelligently question what you’ve got near-zero familiarity with. And again, it was an invitation. No obligation.
You’re hallucinating. I didn’t ask for praise. I responded to the only statement you made that was discussable. Your upshot was that I wasn’t very nice to ownership because I said negative things about it that, according to you, don’t apply. That’s so vague it’s worthless. Your comment as a whole serves the claim that there’s nothing worth discussing here, which just raises the question in my mind why you commented at all. “Nothing to see here folks!” Well, enough that it moved you to state the obvious, supposedly. So, naw, there’s definitely something to see here. But you’d like to dismiss it as nothing, apparently.
Your upshot was that I wasn’t very nice to ownership because I said negative things about it that, according to you, don’t apply. That’s so vague it’s worthless.
The post contains discussable ideas, if you’re interested in discussing them. I’m happy to dive in with you. Your request for examples makes no sense to me. I defined what I mean by “ownership”, there’s no hidden subtext here. Examples are any case in which a person claims the right to deprive others of a desirable.
By that definition, refusing to have sex with someone is ownership. You might call it self-ownership, but you’ve said a lot of negative things about ownership that don’t really apply to it.
Yes, by that definition, a person has a right to deprive others of sexual access to their body. But that would imply that they are not their body, but that their body is an object they have absolute rights over, like a car. An owner breaks no law by taking their brand-new 2025 AMG GT 63 SE to the wrecking yard and having it crushed. So, then, if we own our bodies, why is suicide frowned on, outlawed, and a sin in many religions?
I happen to find objectifying myself and my body that way to be disgusting, because it’s dehumanizing.
Btw, the post is an invitation to discuss. It’s completely fiine to decline an invitation. But the fact that you responded as you did makes me wonder why you felt you couldn’t just gracefully decline.
Responded as I did? Questioned its implications, you mean? That’s to be expected when you put out ideas.
Yes, responded as you did. You can’t intelligently question what you’ve got near-zero familiarity with. And again, it was an invitation. No obligation.
You gave an invitation to discuss it, and then got upset when I accepted the invitation and started to discuss it.
“Discuss” doesn’t mean “praise”.
You’re hallucinating. I didn’t ask for praise. I responded to the only statement you made that was discussable. Your upshot was that I wasn’t very nice to ownership because I said negative things about it that, according to you, don’t apply. That’s so vague it’s worthless. Your comment as a whole serves the claim that there’s nothing worth discussing here, which just raises the question in my mind why you commented at all. “Nothing to see here folks!” Well, enough that it moved you to state the obvious, supposedly. So, naw, there’s definitely something to see here. But you’d like to dismiss it as nothing, apparently.
No it isn’t, I gave a specific example.