Arman · 10 answers · 3y

"If one of the arguments for UBI is that it would reduce poverty and in turn crime, then by this logic state-issued girlfriends would also help reduce crime because inceldom plays an important role in driving some people to do horrible things." Thoughts?

... are these “girlfriends” real live humans being forced into relationships? If so, it’s not the same at all.

Sex is a want not a need. Lack of sex doesn't cause crimes or at least, it shouldn't. I'm celibate and yet I'm not raping or killing anyone or whatever. I'm not going postal. State-issued girlfriends sounds like slavery. No one has a right to sex or a relationship. State-issued sex dolls or sex robots. That would be interesting and cool. I'd be all for that.

I'll just say that it's apples and oranges, you can't just force a relation, tragedy of a lonely incel or not.

dumb logic obviously put forth as a failed attempt at reductio ad absurdum by an anti-UBI redneck

UBI is actually practical, state-issued girlfriends isn't for a number of reasons.

I think nah. Comparing giving out money to giving out women as indentured servants is extremely misogynistic, even if someone is trying to make the point that it wouldn't work out. I don't think a person would come up with this and say, "yes, I'll say this in public, it'll make people think, it'll compute with everyone !" unless they were just pretty misogynic and kinda a psychopath.

What Sean said, but also that seems ridiculous because giving someone a partner wouldn't really treat the root of the problem in incels. also, are there really enough incels causing enough problems of a high enough severity to warrant a government issued solution?

Those things are incomparable - you can give someone money, you cannot give someone a person or a relationship

Retrospring uses Markdown for formatting

*italic text* for italic text

**bold text** for bold text

[link](https://example.com) for link