Category Archives: Transhuman News

Science fiction nerds (self-identified) around the world would immediately recognize the classic phrase from the popular Star Trek franchise, Resistance is futile! as the chilling, mechanical warning delivered whenever the protagonists encountered the hive-like group of beings called the Borg.

Not actually capable of reproducing themselves, the Borg ravaged the spaceways, overpowering sentient beings they encountered and adopting the best technology available from every race they conquered and integrating and absorbing individuals into their collective by force via technological reconditioning.

To me, the Borg represented the most frightening of antagonists, lacking any kind of empathyinsect-like in their collective programming and actions. Their most disturbing hallmarks were their black bodysuits, protruding cybernetic implants, and pale, vacant visages.

And to be honest, the idea of having technological reconditioning devices injected into, running throughout, and sprouting up all over your body (which completely removed your will) gave me the creeps! But we all knew back then that this was just science fiction.

However, considering the pace at which (not just the idea, but the practical implementation of) technological implants are becoming commonplace, perhaps these fictional characters were a bit more prophetic than we realized.

Using science to enhance living standards in a fallen world is a practical and biblical conceptafter all, Jesus is our great physician (Mark 2). It gives us medicines and mechanisms that can help overcome accidents, crime, disease, and disasters.

Tracking devices can help keep people safe, and medical implants can regulate body functions and alleviate pain and risk. And sometimes, for more cosmetic reasons, surgical implants can improve the quality of life for individuals. And, like it or not, the concept of technological implants is becoming much more common in our society.

The most aggressive example of this in terms of implementation is likely billionaire Elon Musks Neuralink project. He hopes to start activating this brain-interface technology and implanting its microchips in humans this year, saying:

According to Musk, Neuralinks chip would be implanted in peoples brains to simultaneously stimulate and record brain activity in the hopes of treating spinal cord injuries and certain neurological disorders.

Another prominent example of mind-linking is the metaverse concept, which has likely seen accelerated interest as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The term metaverse can mean different things to different people, but in broad terms, it generally refers to a shared, enhanced, lifelike virtual world where people interact through virtual reality (VR) or augmented reality (AR) via the internet.

While people currently interact with one another online through social media, messaging applications, and websites, metaverse proponents see it as the next stage of internet development, and the Neurolink (or other similar technologies) implementation is surely a key component in its development.

Presumably, such technology will create online spaces in which peoples interactions can be more multidimensionalfor example, an employee in one part of the world operating a physical machine virtually on the other side of the planet. And the current COVID situation has created an increased demand for ways to make online teaching interaction more lifelike and effective.

So although many people use the word metaverse to primarily describe gaming worlds, many people are envisioning a type of online universe using blockchain technology where users could travel and buy virtual real estate and other digital assets using cryptocurrencies. It will be a place where users will immerse themselves in a whole new way and become linked through digital content rather than simply view it.

And while most reasoning people have no problem with beneficial procedures or applications in technology, like most things, these concepts could possibly produce very negative results as well. And Christians should be aware of one growing movement of particular concern that is rapidly embracing such concepts, dubbed transhumanism.

Transhumanism (as a quick Google search reveals) is the belief or theory that the human race can evolve beyond its current physical and mental limitations, especially by means of science and technology.

A large part of transhumanisms appeal is its overarching inclusivity. As the promotional blurb to the 2019 release of The Transhumanism Handbook on Amazon declared,

Some ideological stances that would seem unlikely to intersect positively (like Intelligent Design advocates and Darwinists, for example) could be imagined swimming happily together in the warm waters of the transhumanist movement.3

Spiritualists, science buffs, ET promoters, and UFOlogists are all able to coexist somewhat comfortably in a movement that at its core contains a self-guided salvation message that ultimately says that mankind is in control of its destiny.

As one Canadian Christian apologist and researcher (Carl Teichrib) explains,

As stated, implicit in the concept are two components married together: the story of evolution and advanced technology. This concept is not a recent one, as the roots of the transhumanist movement can be traced all the way back to the Great Depression.

At that time in the USA, a growing social movement called technocracy began gaining a lot of popularity because of the financial desperation felt by many. People wanted a quick solution, and with the growing crisis hammering the US economy, progressive engineers such as Frederick W. Taylor imagined a world where elite scientists and engineers should replace politicians as a better way to deal with the economic collapse.

One influential technocrat was the professor and published economist Thorstein Veblen, who championed applying Darwinian principles to societys institutions. A contemporary research professor in business studies (University of Hertfordshire) explained,

So the connection of the story of evolution to the technocracy movement (later to become transhumanism) is quite clear.

Many at this point might be thinking, So what? Nothing about this seems nefarious so far. But what they may be forgetting is that the idea of improving mankind through scientific means has been tried before. It was called the eugenics movement (developed by Darwins cousin, Francis Galton).

The worst applications of eugenics were the horrors performed and documented in Nazi Germany based on social Darwinian concepts that some are more or less fit to survive and procreate. In Nazi Germany, this meant the violent removal of some from the gene pool.

However, todays transhumanists tend to focus on more of a utopian model to bring about the ultimate human. And how will this utopia come about? Apparently, modifying our DNA (what could go wrong?) and merging humans with computers capable of artificial intelligence (who would be operating the computers?) will accomplish this. Teichribs article explains:

As the transhumanist website Technolife states,

By the way, this is no fringe movement. The Technolife website represents a research project funded by the European Union consisting of 27 (primarily European) member states, including France, Germany, Sweden, and the UK.

Although transhumanists are aware of the obvious comparison to eugenics, many have dismissed it because of the supposed overwhelmingly positive benefits it will eventually bring to the human race. But what about if someone doesnt wish to participate?

Well, as one transhumanist and human cloning researcher said,

And as you dig deeper into this growing movement, that statement seems to reveal the outlook of many in the transhumanist community. Wanting to be gods, they seem willing to justify the means by which it happens because of the end they seek.

As leading transhumanist Mark Pesce (coinventor of 3D interfacing for the internet and judge on ABCs TV show The New Inventors) puts it,

We will reach into the improbable, re-sequence ourselves into a new Being . . . translating ourselves into supernatural, incorruptible, eternal. There is no God but Man.

Men die, planets die, even stars die. . . . We seek something morea transcendence of transience, translation to incorruptible form. . . . We seek, therefore, to bless ourselves with perfect knowledge and perfect willto become as gods, take the universe in hand, and transform it in our imagefor our own delight.9

The blasphemous and misleading idea that man can become godlike is one that traces all the way back to the garden of Eden (Genesis 3:5), where Eve was deceived. Satan (the father of all lies) lied to Eve and contributed to her doubting Gods words by asking, Did God actually say?

The Apostle Paul also warned born-again believers about being deceived this way and pleaded with them to be on guard against false promises of salvation that come from anywhere but Jesus.

And yet there are professing Christians that are transhumanists whove bought into the concept wholeheartedly. A fellow named James McLean Ledford (who runs the websites Technical-Jesus.com and Hyper-Evolution.com) is one such person.

The description (no longer available) of a talk he did at the 2010 Transhuman and Spirituality Conference (at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City) called Christian Transhumanism contained the following text:

Transhumanisms universalism is truly unmatched. Here we have a movement where professing Christians and atheists converge around the same ideology.

Atheism could actually morph into an acceptable form of theism for atheists in this view. After all, belief in a god/gods is much easier if you are the god in question. Then they could repeat the commonly heard feel-good mantra: just believe in yourself!

A 2003 report, Converging Technologies for Improving Human Performance (CTIHP), revealed some clues. This extensive 405-page document issued by the US National Science Foundation and the Department of Commerce explains,

Apparently, this reports answer to humanitys ultimate problems is a worldwide, technology-induced unity among humans, which, like the Borg, seems radical and inhuman, equivalent to losing your identity.

Transhumanists understand this may not be embraced by the average person, so to assist in convincing those that may not be on board, the CTIHP paper suggests,

Radical indeed. Have Christian parents noticed how radical our public education system has become over the last 20 years?

Transhumanist lingo often refers to the convergence or singularity. In essence, they believe humanity will transcend into a higher plane of existence (sometimes referred to as the techno rapture) but ultimately defined as a point in a future time when technological change takes place so fast it produces a qualitative shift in society . . . the merging of Man and Machine.11

And what would be the result of this singularity in the transhumanists way of thinking? Well, their literature and lectures are replete with references to a future where there are basically no tears, no pain, no struggle, no conflict, and no death. We will have new perfect bodies and minds and eternal life. All of mankinds problems will be solved.

However, although this sounds great to the average person, the entire premise is based on a liethe story of evolution. And the sad fact is, what they are looking for is exactly what God has already promised for those who put their faith and trust in Jesus.

Unfortunately, they dont want to repent of their sin and go through the door of salvation to gain eternal life.

Ultimately, the transhumanist movement is simply deception, a way in which mankind is attempting to achieve eternal lifewithout God.

Read more:
Transhumanism and the Evolution Connection - Answers in Genesis

Clothing and Accessories Olafs Own.

Being crypto-rich is nice, but Olaf Carlson-Wee, a Bitcoin prophet and the founder of the blockchain investment firm Polychain Capital, has grander designs than securing the bag. The 33-year-old Minnesota native wants to make the world a (much, much) better place. Here, he speaks to the philosopher and fellow transhumanist David Pearce about the future of finance, his controversial views on life-extending gene editing, and the end of all suffering.

DAVID PEARCE: Good to see you, Olaf. Greetings from Brighton, England.

OLAF CARLSON-WEE: Im in Manhattan. Very excited to be talking.

PEARCE: I thought we could start by letting people know how we first got to know each other.

CARLSON-WEE: I was an undergraduate student at Vassar College in upstate New York when I stumbled across your archive. I dont remember how I found it, but I kept reading all of these incredible essays and I realized that they were part of this massive web of sites. This must have been in 2010 or 11, right around the time that I was getting interested in cryptocurrency. I sent you an email. We didnt reconnect for years after that. I went off and started a whole endeavor in the cryptocurrency world. First I got involved with Coinbase [a cryptocurrency trading platform]. At that time, it was an extremely nascent early-stage business, running out of an apartment in San Francisco. I was there for three-and-a-half years, and then left that to start my current business, Polychain Capital, which is an investment firm in the cryptocurrency space. At Polychain, we started a speaker series called Strange Genius in 2018. The idea was to bring in outsider thinkers, people who have really interesting ideas about art or technology or how the world can be improved. I thought of you right away. Thats when you first came to San Francisco and we were actually able to meet in person. Id love it if you gave a brief summary of the stuff you wrote that got me so excited as an undergraduate.

PEARCE: Thank you for that. Back in 1995, I wrote an online manifesto, The Hedonistic Imperative, which in spite of its rather debauched title, aims to be morally serious. It essentially outlines how its going to be possible to phase out the biology of pain and suffering in favor of a new architecture of mindlife based entirely on information-sensitive gradients of wellbeing, and eventually superhuman bliss. As well as the philosophical transhumanist stuff, Ive also done practical work on things like the good drug guide, which gives an overview of different pharmacological interventions with an interest in raising pain thresholds, as well as work on gene drives and cultured meat and so forth, because the abolitionist project is about the abolition of suffering in all sentient life, not just humans. Essentially what I aim to do is put my work in the public domain so that young movers and shakers like you will maintain the project. One thing that we have in common is that our passions run opposed to conventional thought. To what extent has this been a consistent theme in your life? How do you overcome the skeptics?

Jacket, Pants, and Shoes by Prada. Necklace Olafs Own.

CARLSON-WEE: That was indeed the reaction from almost everybody in my life back in 2011, when I first got immersed in the world of Bitcoin. I had decided to write my undergraduate thesis on cryptocurrencythe technology, and the social implications of what would happen if it were to grow substantially. My professors were very skeptical of the entire concept. Nobody had ever heard of Bitcoin or cryptocurrency. But my whole life, Ive felt a little bit like an alien. I was born and raised in rural Minnesota. Both of my parents were Lutheran ministers. I had to seek out alternative media and resources online to learn about things that werent directly around me in a world that was church, and school, and soccer. Ive found that when you stick to your own personal intuition, you often get the best outcome. You need to be tethered to reality and make sure that youre being analytical in your thinking. At the same time, following my intuition, even when Im not totally sure where it will take me, has been critical to finding the path that I want to be on. Youve really stuck with a lot of ideas that people might find not only disinteresting, but morally reprehensible. How have you dealt with the haters?

PEARCE: The haters are a minority. Most people, when they stumble across the idea of getting rid of suffering altogether, think of utopian dreaming. Surprisingly, the most opposition Ive encountered is about phasing out predators like lions and tigers. I think well need to genetically reprogram them. Some people are absolutely aghast at that idea, but if we are morally serious about getting rid of suffering, were going to have to edit our genetic source code. This invites charges of eugenics. But I think all prospective parents should have access to pre-implantation genetic screening and counseling, and soon CRISPR genome editing, replacing todays genetic crapshoot. Technically speaking, this is eugenics. I dont like the term in view of 20th century historyit can trigger some very strange feelings. I assumed that my views were essentially unpublishable. Then the World Wide Web came along and I realized it was possible to get these views to a global audience. What interested you in Bitcoin when you were at college?

CARLSON-WEE: I entered college in 2008, right in the wake of the financial crisis. There was a feeling that the entire system was stilted against the little guy, and that the incumbent interests of the legacy financial systems and Wall Street were really there for their benefit and not for our benefit as regular people. It made me start thinking about who controls the system of currency. The Federal Reserve, as it turns out, is a pseudo-private entity that controls the dollar. And its unelected officials who determine what the value of the dollar is, and how banks can borrow it. Things like that have massive rippling implications for the entire global economy. When I was getting into Bitcoin, I didnt have a clear view of how it would all play out. But I had an intuitive feeling that if we could rewrite the global economic and financial system with a software-based substrate that was run by an algorithm that nobody controlled, rather than by a central bank system, there would be a huge wealth transfer from traditional elites to those in the cryptocurrency sphere. Over the last ten years, weve seen this play out in a pretty big way. The incredible part is that anybody can write that software. Its not closed off in the same way as traditional finance. Its not perfect, but I do think its a massive improvement.

Clothing and Accessories Olafs Own.

PEARCE: After school you spent quite a lot of time alone in northern Minnesota. Could you say a bit more about this time in your life?

CARLSON-WEE: After I graduated in 2012, I had a long thesis on cryptocurrency, and not a lot of real skills for the hard-nosed economy I was about to enter. I spent about a year traveling around the United States, mostly living out of a backpack with a tent and a sleeping bag, crashing on friends couches. I was resistant to jump into a system that I didnt necessarily want to be a part of. The prospect of getting a nine-to-five job, paying rent, and living in a city was not very appealing to me. I ended up working as a lumberjack in a small communal mountain town in northern Washington called Holden Village. It wasnt a commercial lumber operation; I was literally creating wood to heat the village over the winter. The town was created around a copper mine but it went bankrupt and was taken over by the Lutheran church in the 60s. It was co-opted by hippies in the 60s and 70s, and continues to be this amazing example of a voluntary community that oscillates between the winter and the summer from about 60 to maybe 350 people. It was a very peaceful and quiet life. After my stint as a lumberjack, I went to northern Minnesota to stay in my grandparents cabin that was built in the 40s. I didnt really see anyone for a couple of months while I was there. Thats when I went really deep and decided that cryptocurrency was what I wanted to work on. I continued expanding on my undergraduate thesis. I also got into electronic music production, and deeper into ideas of transhumanism and life-extension. I was thinking of ways that we could improve the legacy system we have that was designed for reproduction, and not necessarily for the well-being of the person that has to live with it. That was the philosophical foundation for what I want to promote in the world, which is not just the redistribution of resources through politics, but solving the deepest problems of the human condition through technology. It was a very deep and intense time that ended with me sleeping on a friends couch in Oakland. Thats when I cold-emailed Coinbase and said, Ill do any job. I started there as customer support in early 2013, and the rest is history.

PEARCE: Can you describe your own personal vision of the future?

CARLSON-WEE: I think its possible to create technologies that keep us nimble, healthy, and mentally agile for much longer than we naturally biologically would. I also think its possible to improve massively on our hedonic set point, the default state of being that we live every day, with biotechnology and tools like genetic engineering to massively improve the Darwinian hardware were born into. This is the big project we need to focus on. We will never solve the biggest problems through political solutions that rearrange the way resources are distributed. My hope is that cryptocurrency can be a globally distributed and democratized financial substrate, and can unlock the ability to fund and research a future that is focused, not just on making people materially wealthier, but qualitatively happier and healthier. I think everybody agrees that once people have a warm place to sleep and food to eat, what really matters to them is friends and family and the quality of their experiences, rather than further enhancement of the physical conditions of their existence. I hope that in the far future, we can have infinite bliss, immortality, and wont need to worry so much about material conditions for the average person. I hope we can get to a place where people can be comfortable with very little, and not be in this rat race of consumption, and focus instead on artistic endeavors like film and music and immersive virtual reality. These things can create sublime experiences for people while working to improve the hardware that were running, the hardware being our physical bodies. To me, the mind is the final frontier.

Clothing and Accessories Olafs Own.

PEARCE: Yes. As a transhumanist I believe in a civilization of super intelligence, super longevity and super happiness. The era of scientific exploration has only just begun. But back to the here and now. Everyone knows you as a cryptocurrency expert. What are your other passions?

CARLSON-WEE: One of the ways that I got interested in what consciousness could be, if we could manipulate it with a more rigorous scientific approach, was lucid dreaming. For nine years, I wrote down my dreams every morning when I woke up, and gained an incredible ability to control them. The lucid dream state is remarkable because of two things. One, there are innate rules that we take for granted, so things like gravity or time can be heavily manipulated. And two, you can manifest anything to your senses that you can imagine. Theres this incredible feedback loop between your imagination and your senses that isntthere when you are awake. Im hopeful that more people can experience that, because its incredibly powerful and freeing to be able to map your imagination onto your senses. Im also very interested in experimental art like music production, independent film, and fiction writing, and being a patron for emerging artists. I cant talk about it yet, but Im producing my first television show and Im very excited about it. Art is another way that people can elevate themselves and have sublime experiences that expand their vision of whats possible. Theres such an incredible focus on politics in modern society, and which politician is right or wrong. Its not that its not important, its that theres a whole other set of questions about what were trying to do as a society that people dont ask much. Im hopeful that more and more people will wake up to the idea of massively improving the human condition.

PEARCE: Thanks for sharing your vision.

CARLSON-WEE: Its great to talk and I wish you the best. And when I say the best, I mean, as youve often signed your emails to me, infinite bliss.

PEARCE: Infinite bliss to you, too.

Grooming: Annette Chaisson using Sykn Iceland at Exclusive Artists

Fashion Assistant: Anna Huge

Read more from the original source:
After Winning Big on Crypto, Olaf Carlson-Wee Wants to Change the World - Interview

Image via Tukker_Barnes/YouTube

Late Tuesday evening, comedian and magician John Edward Szeles aka The Amazing Johnathan, passed away after a long struggle with heart disease. His last words were spoken to his wife and manager of many years, Anastasia Synn. Now many of the performers well-wishers want to know more about Synn, one of the most important people in Johnathans life.

Synn and Szeles were married in 2014. Like Szeles, Synn was also a magician, as well as a sideshow stunt performer, and performance artist. The pair met while Synn was performing at the Harmon Theater, where Szeles performed for over six years. The couple worked together at Ballys Casino in Las Vegas for a few years before they were wed in a ceremony at A Special Memory Chapel in Las Vegas in front of an audience made up of A-list Vegas performers, including Penn and Teller, Jeff McBride, and David Copperfield. Comedian Gallagher performed the ceremony.

As a magician, Synn specializes in a shocking brand of magic that features, among other things inserting large needles completely through her arm. Synn has performed her act on Penn and Tellers Fool Us and has appeared alongside The Amazing Johnathan on Pax TVs Masters of Illusion. Synn appeared on the cover of Vanish, the international magic magazine, for its September 2019 issue. In addition to her managerial duties, Synn had worked alongside her husband for several years and would often take over the show when Szeles became too fatigued to continue.

In addition to her career as a performer, Synn is also known as a biohacktivist and as an advocate for transhumanism. Synn currently has 26 magnets and microchips embedded in her body. According to her website, she uses the implants for the purposes of magic, experimentation, and extended sensory perception. The biohacking community claim that the magnets can endow the implantee with a sense of electromagnetic awareness while the chips can perform various functions such as activating Synns home computer or unlocking her doors. Synns testimony in front of the Nevada Senate regarding a law prohibiting RFID chip implants was instrumental in defeating the bill.

Synn took to Facebook Tuesday night after her husband became unresponsive to make a plea for privacy in her time of grief. Syn wrote, I dont think we thought this day would ever come because he is so strong and has beaten it so many times. Thank you for all the well wishes, but as the news spreads its getting overwhelming and Im going to have to take a step back. I love you and thank you for your support.

'+// ''+// '

Go here to read the rest:
Who Is Anastasia Synn, Widow of Magician The Amazing Johnathan? - We Got This Covered

22/02/2022 - The leading Swiss festival and forum on human rights is ready to explore all the burning issues through a selection of films and events

Red Jungle by Juan Jos Lozano and Zoltn Horvth

Taking place in Geneva from 4-13 March, the 20th edition of the International Film Festival and Forum on Human Rights (FIFDH) offers an international selection of fiction films and documentaries, as well as debates, interviews, meetings, master classes, exhibitions and a concert by Barbara Hendricks, the festivals patron. The FIFDH is bringing in new audio and video formats, several exclusive podcasts and a selection of films on VoD.

A total of nine films are taking part in the Competition Fiction, with the mixed-animation drama Red Jungle by Juan Jos Lozano and Zoltn Horvth (Switzerland/France) having its world premiere. The section also includes 107 Mothers[+see also: filmreviewtrailerinterview: Peter Kerekesfilmprofile] by Peter Kerekes (Slovakia/Czech Republic/Ukraine), Casablanca Beats[+see also: filmreviewtrailerfilmprofile] by Nabil Ayouch (France/Morocco), Europa[+see also: filmreviewtrailerfilmprofile] by Haider Rashid (Italy/Kuwait/Iraq), Freda[+see also: filmreviewtrailerfilmprofile] by Gessica Gnus (Haiti/Benin/France), Good Madam by Jenna Cato Bass (South Africa), Hit the Road by Panah Panahi (Iran), Luzzu[+see also: filmreviewtrailerinterview: Alex Camillerifilmprofile] by Alex Camilleri (Malta/USA) and Vera Dreams of the Sea[+see also: filmreviewtrailerinterview: Kaltrina Krasniqifilmprofile] by Kaltrina Krasniqi (Kosovo/North Macedonia/Albania).

Furthermore, nine documentaries are included in the Competition - Creative Documentaries, with two of them, Angels of Sinjar by Oscar-nominated filmmaker Hanna Polak (Libya/Italy) and Je suis noires by Juliana Fanjul and Rachel M'Bon (Switzerland), having their world premieres at FIFDH. The remainder of the selection features A Night of Knowing Nothing[+see also: filmreviewfilmprofile] by Payal Kapadia (India/France), After a Revolution[+see also: filmreviewfilmprofile] by Giovanni Buccomino (UK/Italy), Invisible Demons by Rahul Jain (India/Finland/Germany/USA), The Last Shelter[+see also: filmreviewtrailerfilmprofile] by Ousmane Samassekou (Mali/France/South Africa), Nelly & Nadine[+see also: filmreviewtrailerinterview: Magnus Gerttenfilmprofile] by Magnus Gertten (Sweden/Belgium/Norway), The Silence of the Mole by Anas Taracena (Guatemala) and Penelope My Love[+see also: filmreviewinterview: Claire Doyonfilmprofile] by Claire Doyon (France).

Also, 20 debates, eight in-depth interviews, six conversations and six activists' talks are featured this year. Among them is a debate with whistle-blower Chelsea Manning, while artificial intelligence and transhumanism will be discussed with neuroscientist Olaf Blanke and philosopher Nita Farahany. Ecology and the rights of nature are at the core of two debates, and green finance will be examined by essayist Lucile Schmidt and explorer Bertrand Piccard. Finally, a discussion about Why Does It Take So Long for Humans to Respect Human Rights? will bring together former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Kate Gilmore, neuroscientist Nayef Al-Rodhan and primatologist Richard Wrangham. The FIFDH honours women and gender minorities, welcoming Sudanese photographer Eythar Gubara, artist Chuu Wai Nyein from Myanmar, Afghan filmmaker Shahrbanoo Sadat and Iranian Nobel Peace Prize laureate Shirin Ebadi.

Finally, the FIFDH is launching a network of podcasts on cinema and human rights in conjunction with its partners, where filmmakers, artists, researchers, authors, journalists, photographers and reporters will share their personal experiences, creative processes and the qualities that make them unique, thus helping to question our identities, build a collective memory and testify to a changing world.

Read more here:
The 20th FIFDH announces its programme - Cineuropa

In the wake of Valentines Day, the most straightforward answer to the question posed by the title of feminist philosopher Nina Powers new book What Do Men Want (2022) appears simple a woman a man, or perhaps, someone with a different gender identity.

But in the 2020s, asking the question is itself provocative, and many feminists might immediately revolt at the premise. It might be one reason the book, according to an anecdote from a sales clerk, is not being stocked in many branches of Waterstones (something it seems to share with some other recent books on feminism and gender).

Although sexism has by no means been eliminated across liberal democratic societies, some problems men shoulder are rarely acknowledged, including disproportionate drug use, male-on-male physical violence, and others, Power observes.

A scattering of responses to the question What do Men Want? appear across the pages of the book. Central among them include virtues traditionally associated with men but are also exhibited by women, including self-control, courage, and the ability to juggle seriousness, humour, and forgiveness.

It is these traits, Power argues, that, even more so than men themselves, are today deemed obsolete or toxic at a time when people of both sexes can fulfil their desires instantly online via porn and dating apps or through shopping sprees.

The actual villains in much of What do Men Want are neither men nor women, but the impersonal, though seductive, entities of capitalism and computer technologies. In 2022, these include social media apps and the beckoning sirens of performative sites including OnlyFans and the appeal of a pain-free existence via Zoom.

The major commonality What Do Men Want has with Powers previous major work, One-Dimensional Woman, is an analysis of how the imperatives of consumerism to embody a stereotype of a feminine or masculine ideal is leaving people friendless and isolated.

Philosopher, sociologist and cultural theorist Jean Baudrillards prescient analysis of a dystopian world dominated by a blizzard of visuals and deceptive imagery is evoked repeatedly to underscore the jungle women, and especially men, inhabit today.

In an environment of distrust, examples of men as dangerous and male violence viewed as a semi-essential characteristic, has only dumped more poison into the social well. No wonder, Power reflects, men are seeking an exit, whether that be a zombified life in front of a video game system, or, tragically, via suicide, a disturbing trend affecting men more than women.

Power is unafraid to discuss the ins and outs of an alphabet soup of internet subcultures including incels, NoFAP, and MGTOW that have been considered controversial at best and are linked to terrorism at worst.

Involvement in these groups, she argues, is not innately pathological, but demonstrates a longing among men and boys for genuine father figures, which in feminist literature embody the ultimate Big Bad the patriarchy.

Absent a validatory image of the father, Power argues, sibling rivalry between and among men and women has run rampant. Nowhere is this more virulent than in the fever swamps of Twitter, where the desire to eliminate the competition translates into cancel culture and sneering digital cliques.

Even worse, she adds, perpetual immaturity and infantilization reign. The safetyism increasingly demanded in transactional relationships not only between men and women, but between the state and the human being, has had a chilling effect in public and private spheres alike.

In this culture, controversial gurus including Jordan Peterson and pseudo-anonymous influencers have struck a chord with their disciplinary tone. So too have fully uncorked leaders that promise an escape from freedom, representing masculinity at its worst, such as Donald Trump. In South Korea, so-called angry young men are currently driving political debate, by fomenting a sweaty discontent over the supposedly dangerous egalitarianism promoted by a culture increasingly accepting of womens rights.

At 179 pages, this is an impassioned essay of a book. It does not aim to be, nor succeeds in being, comprehensive. Some burning issues debated by feminist philosophers, and in the Anglosphere media alike, including transgenderism and transhumanism, are discussed and hang over the text, but are not directly addressed. The college participation gap between men and women and the continued existence of the stereotype that being interested in academic achievement is somehow unmanly would also be interesting topics to examine at greater length.

A taboo cry to accept the imperatives of risk can be heard in the pages of What Do Men Want?, and this is a risky book. It is also a vital one, a defiant flame that refuses to be dampened by the social rain of voguish expectations and political pieties.

Read more:
What Do Men Want Review Guys and Dolls in the Digital Age - The Boar