Byung-Chul Han, the philosopher who lives life backwards: ‘We believe we’re free, but we’re the sexual organs of capital’
Byung-Chul Han, the philosopher who lives life backwards: ‘We believe we’re free, but we’re the sexual organs of capital’
EL PAÍS met with the famous thinker in Berlin. Known for his short sentences, the author of ‘The Burnout Society’ works at night and sleeps during the day
tw: sexual assault
edited to add: tldr- ppb to this guy for his takes that are pro sexual assault.
spoiler
The Korean-born philosopher has just published The Crisis of Narration, a book in which he argues that, today, narration is indistinguishable from advertising: people and politicians market their lives on social media. It’s all about advertising and self-promotion. He compares storytelling to storyselling — communicating through stories versus selling through stories. Quality doesn’t seem to matter — the important thing is to simply sell whatever you have to offer. We all fall into this: politicians, journalists, social media users… which results in lots of little blurbs without depth. Hence the crisis of narration.
^Ok this guy has some good takes.
"But now, this movement against sexual violence has turned into violence. It has destroyed eros, it has destroyed seduction. I know many actresses, who are very independent — and many feminists — who reject this [#MeToo movement], because it destroys seduction.”
^Ok this guy has some terrible takes wtf. He thinks the movement against sexual violence has turned into "violence"? He's sad that it has "destroyed eros"? It's not seduction if it's not consentual, that's sexual assault. What the fuck is wrong with this dude. It's disappointing that a guy who gets to spend his life thinking about things and living in relative peace still has such dogshit opinions and analysis like this. What a whiny incel train of thought to give a shit about. Fuck this guy.
Edit: for a guy calling us the "sexual organs of capital" he should really update his understanding of sexual assault, namely what it is and that its wrong.
because it destroys seduction
Treatbrain with sex pest characteristics
I don't think that Han is taking a pro sexual assault position here. But others should judge with the full passage as context
spoiler
Uncomfortable with the typical interview format, he embraces his freedom at all times, often choosing what he wants to talk about. He starts by talking about a case of sexual assault that has recently gripped Spain, after star footballer Jenni Hermoso was forcibly kissed by the president of the Spanish Football Federation upon winning the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup final.
“If I think about a kiss philosophically, that wasn’t a kiss… because he [Rubiales, who has since resigned] kissed her and she didn’t kiss him. That’s violence. This whole #MeToo movement was good. Fighting back against sexual violence is good. But now, this movement against sexual violence has turned into violence. It has destroyed eros, it has destroyed seduction. I know many actresses, who are very independent — and many feminists — who reject this [#MeToo movement], because it destroys seduction.”
no, he definitely is. tw: sexual assault
spoiler
Even with the context, it is still pro sexual assault. Maybe he doesn't see it that way, but he is still spreading rape culture. "The movement against sexual violence has turned into violence" is calling anti-sexual violence action violence. That is simply not true. He goes on to elaborate: "It has destroyed eros, it has destroyed seduction. " That's what he's calling violence. That's what he's saying is as bad as rape. He's saying that getting someone's consent before touching them is tantamount to violence to the toucher because it's "destroying eros" and "destroying seduction." Those things are really not equal at all. Getting consent before touching someone is mandatory, and if someone finds it a burden, that's not violence being done to them, not even close. This guy is promoting rape culture, full stop.
Edited to add: if this type of reasoning fools you, you should do some self-work regarding feminism. His reasoning is basically the same as someone saying " 1. Example of something vaguely feminist" 2. That feminist thing I just said was ok in the past, but now things have gone too far" 3. Promotion of sexual violence. 4. It's ok, I have women friends who are misogynistic and agree with me." He's packaging this whole thing to promote rape culture values. If you're not able to see that, you should do some self-work around feminism.