This is, for the most part a pretty PG blog, although there’s certainly no taboo on sex here. This post, though, will not be PG. The short version of the preceding events is that a person named Aella organized a gang bang for her birthday to which everyone was invited to apply for a spot. Aella is a sometime internet celebrity and
As someone with intimate insights into the mind of a woman, I would guess a lot of other women feel like she's receiving more than her share of male attention by "cheating"--loudly and proudly defecting on norms of propriety. If this is right, in these cases the subconscious motivation is less disgust toward sex in general and more a policing of the boundaries of appropriate behavior on part of a woman, to protect one's own status as a sexually desirable being. I think this because I have my own more roundabout version. It's excellent that she delights so much in her sexuality so publicly, and claims that she should not baffle and amuse me. But when I started to think she was overpraised for her survey work and other intellectual output, I would get irrationally, disproportionately upset, especially when high status men swooped in to defend her against some rudimentary demands for better methodology. I would find myself thinking "No! That's not fair! She /does/ need to learn to statistics and she /does/ need to read the primary literature and she did not invent the field of sex research and you horny goons need to stop coddling her!" Leaving aside whether any of this is true or important, the impetus was how much attention she was getting for her intellectual output specifically. If women broadly started to get credit for their good thoughts in proportion to their sexual openness, bad things would happen to both the intellectual sphere and women generally (I disagreed with Regan Arntz-Gray's piece https://www.allcatsarefemale.com/p/thirst-trapping-your-way-to-the-top for this reason, although I don't think we're really at risk of sliding into this pit any time soon). More women are invested in their ability to receive sexual attention without having to expose themselves as much as Aella does, than are invested in their ability to receive attention for blog posts without having to expose themselves as much as Aella does, but the psychological motivation is the same--and you could argue that the desire to receive attention for good work is rooted in sexual competition anyhow. Many people would round this off to jealousy, but I think desire to punish perceived cheaters is closer to the core. I can't speak as much to the experience of straight men, but I wonder whether some aren't also invested in upholding these norms (primitively, subconsciously) in part to keep their own "goods" from "depreciating".
I wonder how many people that are being critical of Aella actually read her whole Substack essay about her birthday gangbang. My guess is very few. I subscribe to her Substack and read the essay. I have a very hard time condemning her for anything associated with the events she described. It’s definitely not an event I would want to participate in, but that’s a “me thing” not an “Aella thing.”
I'm male, not gay, a serial monogamist, and not drawn to Aella, though I find her experiments very interesting. While reading her blog I just could not imagine being a participant at her birthday gangbang. I was more surprised by the male participants at her gangbang than by Aella herself. I kind of get Aella and her desire to experiment with sexual limits, but I don't get the desire of the men involved. For me, her experiments are fascinating insights to parts of male sexuality that I find hard to understand. Anyway, I appreciate your efforts to challenge the rationality of the extreme negative reactions but with something as basic as sex you're pushing it up hill.
I think the definition of disgust used here isn't correct. Like if I were to make a scale of most disgusting thing to least disgusting sex, scat would be at one end and shower sex would be at the other and the orgies under discussion would be somewhere in the middle. It's not a moral judgment. There can definitely be a term for this moral judgment scale but it's not disgust.
No idea who Aella is, so I had took her up. I see she writes a post on substack. It doesn't sound that interesting. I don't particularly like titillation or pornography. I have no idea if her substack is either. I'm not disgusted by it, I just don't find it very thrilling or exciting or titillating.
A hint of exposed cleavage in a real can excite me quite, a sterile photo less so. So I don't understand any of this. If one is excited by Aella or by what she does, fine. What has it do with me.? How can I be disgusted by something that I have no desire for or doesn't excite me? If I do, then I'm probably trying to pretend I'm not excited. If I am excited and am disgusted, then I'm probably just lonely, or fearful of being excited, or for whatever other reason "disgusted" by what I want or just don't want others to know what I desire.
I would think it just really boils down to Aella is a threatening Lilith to misogynist men, or a liberating dream of oppressed woman by misogynist men.
I find it hard to believe that "disgust" of Lilith is really anything more than persons disgusted of themselves by their own desires. As is most moral objections to what others do with their bodies. Oh you farted, how disgusting. You're been working in the sun and you're sweating, how disgusting.
How can natural things be disgusting?
You know what's disgusting...people who try to interfere in other people's actions or force themselves actively upon another. I find that rather disgusting.
I'm a bit disturbed by this post and it has nothing to do with Aella. The category of non harmful "disgust worthy" sins is what I take exception to. Would I fault someone for being disgusted by one or all of these? No but neither would I for someone disgusted by a kink, disgust is an emotion, a heuristic for non ethical behavior or harmful things but not synonymous with believing something is harmful or unethical. If worthiness means you feel comfortable having a disgust reaction then fine, but I read it a bit more like meaning deserving, and I would reserve that for things that are not just harmful but heinous.
Re birthday girl, good for her! I think she's at times been a bit incautious in what she posts given that she's a thought leader, gangbang thing isn't an example. I doubt we'd agree on politics but I get the feeling she's pretty much a good person and has deliberately made herself moreso.
As someone with intimate insights into the mind of a woman, I would guess a lot of other women feel like she's receiving more than her share of male attention by "cheating"--loudly and proudly defecting on norms of propriety. If this is right, in these cases the subconscious motivation is less disgust toward sex in general and more a policing of the boundaries of appropriate behavior on part of a woman, to protect one's own status as a sexually desirable being. I think this because I have my own more roundabout version. It's excellent that she delights so much in her sexuality so publicly, and claims that she should not baffle and amuse me. But when I started to think she was overpraised for her survey work and other intellectual output, I would get irrationally, disproportionately upset, especially when high status men swooped in to defend her against some rudimentary demands for better methodology. I would find myself thinking "No! That's not fair! She /does/ need to learn to statistics and she /does/ need to read the primary literature and she did not invent the field of sex research and you horny goons need to stop coddling her!" Leaving aside whether any of this is true or important, the impetus was how much attention she was getting for her intellectual output specifically. If women broadly started to get credit for their good thoughts in proportion to their sexual openness, bad things would happen to both the intellectual sphere and women generally (I disagreed with Regan Arntz-Gray's piece https://www.allcatsarefemale.com/p/thirst-trapping-your-way-to-the-top for this reason, although I don't think we're really at risk of sliding into this pit any time soon). More women are invested in their ability to receive sexual attention without having to expose themselves as much as Aella does, than are invested in their ability to receive attention for blog posts without having to expose themselves as much as Aella does, but the psychological motivation is the same--and you could argue that the desire to receive attention for good work is rooted in sexual competition anyhow. Many people would round this off to jealousy, but I think desire to punish perceived cheaters is closer to the core. I can't speak as much to the experience of straight men, but I wonder whether some aren't also invested in upholding these norms (primitively, subconsciously) in part to keep their own "goods" from "depreciating".
This is the issue in a nutshell: https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/592:_Drama
I wonder how many people that are being critical of Aella actually read her whole Substack essay about her birthday gangbang. My guess is very few. I subscribe to her Substack and read the essay. I have a very hard time condemning her for anything associated with the events she described. It’s definitely not an event I would want to participate in, but that’s a “me thing” not an “Aella thing.”
I'm male, not gay, a serial monogamist, and not drawn to Aella, though I find her experiments very interesting. While reading her blog I just could not imagine being a participant at her birthday gangbang. I was more surprised by the male participants at her gangbang than by Aella herself. I kind of get Aella and her desire to experiment with sexual limits, but I don't get the desire of the men involved. For me, her experiments are fascinating insights to parts of male sexuality that I find hard to understand. Anyway, I appreciate your efforts to challenge the rationality of the extreme negative reactions but with something as basic as sex you're pushing it up hill.
I think the definition of disgust used here isn't correct. Like if I were to make a scale of most disgusting thing to least disgusting sex, scat would be at one end and shower sex would be at the other and the orgies under discussion would be somewhere in the middle. It's not a moral judgment. There can definitely be a term for this moral judgment scale but it's not disgust.
No idea who Aella is, so I had took her up. I see she writes a post on substack. It doesn't sound that interesting. I don't particularly like titillation or pornography. I have no idea if her substack is either. I'm not disgusted by it, I just don't find it very thrilling or exciting or titillating.
A hint of exposed cleavage in a real can excite me quite, a sterile photo less so. So I don't understand any of this. If one is excited by Aella or by what she does, fine. What has it do with me.? How can I be disgusted by something that I have no desire for or doesn't excite me? If I do, then I'm probably trying to pretend I'm not excited. If I am excited and am disgusted, then I'm probably just lonely, or fearful of being excited, or for whatever other reason "disgusted" by what I want or just don't want others to know what I desire.
I would think it just really boils down to Aella is a threatening Lilith to misogynist men, or a liberating dream of oppressed woman by misogynist men.
I find it hard to believe that "disgust" of Lilith is really anything more than persons disgusted of themselves by their own desires. As is most moral objections to what others do with their bodies. Oh you farted, how disgusting. You're been working in the sun and you're sweating, how disgusting.
How can natural things be disgusting?
You know what's disgusting...people who try to interfere in other people's actions or force themselves actively upon another. I find that rather disgusting.
I'm a bit disturbed by this post and it has nothing to do with Aella. The category of non harmful "disgust worthy" sins is what I take exception to. Would I fault someone for being disgusted by one or all of these? No but neither would I for someone disgusted by a kink, disgust is an emotion, a heuristic for non ethical behavior or harmful things but not synonymous with believing something is harmful or unethical. If worthiness means you feel comfortable having a disgust reaction then fine, but I read it a bit more like meaning deserving, and I would reserve that for things that are not just harmful but heinous.
Re birthday girl, good for her! I think she's at times been a bit incautious in what she posts given that she's a thought leader, gangbang thing isn't an example. I doubt we'd agree on politics but I get the feeling she's pretty much a good person and has deliberately made herself moreso.