Hacker News Reader

Comment by GauntletWizard | Hacker News Reader

I don't think we do. As the article notes, these are not new concepts - the Greeks had four words for different types of loves, as recently as 50 years ago they were still known and understood in pop culture [1]

It is a recent invention that has us all confused. The rush to validate the gay rights movement has pushed people far beyond their comfort zone, and the culture war has put pressure on people to assert their allegiance to the camps by overstating or denying their deep connections. "I love you bro" was actually a pretty common sentiment, and now many very progressive people feel the need to qualify it - "I love you, bro, but not like in a sexual way, not that there's anything wrong with that"

Lines have been blurred and confused and nobody's the better for it. It is a shift in religion that caused us to lose our knowledge of how to love someone as a friend.

[1]https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Four_Loves

View on HN

Niobe Way comes to similar conclusions in Deep Secrets: Boys’ Friendships and the Crisis of Connection but I’m not sure I’d pin it on a shift in religion but the hyper-sexualization of society that started in the 60’s where every intimate relationship was primarily defined in the context of sex. Today much of the language and expressions of intimate relationships has been entirely co-opted and has sexual overtones compared to the 1800’s. Expressions such as holding hands and words such as love and intimate all now have sexual overtones they previously did not.

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2011/04/the-secret-li...

https://dustyoldthing.com/19th-century-concept-of-friendship...

I'm saying that the hyper-sexualization is a religion, or at least part of one. It is part of a series of memes that redefine all human relationships in terms of "Power", some nebulous concept that does not really map to the way humans interact except in a very weird misunderstanding of second-order effects.

Call it Queer, call it Progressive, call it Woke or whatever - It's religion.

This is a very surreal argument to see made, because my father's big theory on the modern left is that they've all gone a little bit chaste.

this is even worse than what you originally wrote.

How is it worse? Or even bad?

The ancient Greeks had actually at least 6 words for the different types of love: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_words_for_love

Yes, I think the article stumbled on this topic by describing a limitation of the term philia when in fact there were other terms for other concepts.

"...and now many very progressive people feel the need to qualify it - "I love you, bro, but not like in a sexual way, not that there's anything wrong with that""

I cannot relate to that even a little and it is wildly incompatible with my lived experiences. Maybe back in the 90's there was some of that going on. But I know plenty of men I could call right now and tell them I love them without either of us grasping for some "I'm straight" life preserver. The entire concept sounds tragically outdated.

If anything, the modern progressive crowd that GP is referencing are far more likely to find the reflexive qualifiers themselves problematic.

I agree. I am very close to one friend, who is reasonably high on the Kinsey scale, though I am not. It is a source of frustration to me that deep friendships between men get reduced to something sexual, as if men were incapable of forming attachments that aren't based around our dicks. Women can be particularly nasty about it.

> The rush to validate the gay rights movement has pushed people far beyond their comfort zone, and the culture war has put pressure on people to assert their allegiance to the camps by overstating or denying their deep connections. "I love you bro" was actually a pretty common sentiment, and now many very progressive people feel the need to qualify it - "I love you, bro, but not like in a sexual way, not that there's anything wrong with that"

to counter your anecdote, in all my years of experiencing strong, platonic same-sex friendships - including ones in which we expressed love for each other - i have not once thought even for a moment about the gay rights movement, or anyone's perception of my sexuality.

i think your comment may reveal more about your own state of mind than it does anything broader about society. i encourage you to reflect on that.

* edited to remove unnecessary sarcasm. as has always been true, but is especially the case now, it's impossible to tell if someone is arguing in good or bad faith on the web. but i'm going to assume you're talking about your lived experience and are open to a discussion on this and not a troll trying to spread right-wing talking points.

> i think your comment may reveal more about your own state of mind than it does anything broader about society. i encourage you to reflect on that.

Seems like you are the one trying to troll here. Probably it depends on where you live but my experience align with those of GP.

> the rush to validate

do you mean society would be better off if gay rights took longer to catch on?

> nobody is better for it... shift in religion

I am better for it. I have never been religious, though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com