What progress looks like: Men’s magazine wants to purge itself of Pick Up Artist bullshit » « An argument to reconsider words is not “thought policing”

Should we mock people who use virtual girlfriend services?

At Daily Beast, I argued maybe not.

This is key. The problem here isn’t necessarily the person, but the expectations of others, like family members. If someone really does feel some freedom to live their life without parents prying, why should we view that as “sad”? Why should we consider this option worthy of scorn when it’s a way for someone, who is not as free or as stable in their relationships as the rest of us, to deal with problems?

While ideally our relationship lives are no one’s business, people from all over the world still are afraid of revealing their sexual orientation, their views on marriage, and so on. The specter of religious tradition obviously looms large and, as much as faith is losing its impact, it still has an effect on older generations’ judgments of the rest of us. A service that can help mitigate bigoted fears can provide some form of freedom to gain strength, security, and a real partner if they so choose.

Read the whole piece there.

What progress looks like: Men’s magazine wants to purge itself of Pick Up Artist bullshit » « An argument to reconsider words is not “thought policing”

Comments

  3. says

    The product isn’t the problem, the market is.
    Because obviously the goal is to make the pesky people in your life shut up about your relationship status.
    The value people are getting out of this product isn’t love, intimacy or sex, it’s just that others stop inflicting harm on you. That is fucked up. We really need to change culture on many levels. Be it acceptance of sexual orientation or stopping people to label singles, whether voluntarily or not, losers.