Read Kollontai you nerds. Standardized expressions of love and sexuality are a superstructural product of the economic mode of production, but they are not constructed out of whole cloth. Yes romantic attraction is heavily commodified and alienating in our late capitalist hell, but no it is not a fiction designed to sell valentines cards. Like all things capital exploits, there’s a natural resource there being stolen and sold back to you
Edit: in re-reading this comment I'd like to make an addendum because I feel like it could be misconstrued that I'm not being supportive of aromantic comrades. The normalization of romance as a need is an outcropping of the capitalist mode of production, it justifies the nuclear family as a vehicle of property inheritance and it punishes those who try to exist outside of it. There very well are people who do not experience the need of romantic relationships just as there are people who never experience the need of sexual relationships, etc. I can see the argument that because modern conceptualizations of romance are a construct of the capitalist material reality they're therefore invalid and should be abolished, but abolition rarely means destruction rather than liberation. A liberated 'sex love' dynamic (to use Kollontai's term) would be in the freedom to pursue the relationships that fulfill your needs without the coercion of economic factors like whether a given partner could help you afford a mortgage (because god forbid any given partner isn't your business partner, I mean soulmate). This means freedom to pursue partners who fulfill the needs you do have whether they're sexual, romantic, or just in terms of emotional support, possibly even from multiple partners. So no I wouldn't say romantic feelings are a fabrication of whoever makes those chalk hearts that say "luv u" on them, but aromantic comrades are completely valid in feeling that bourgeois notions of sexual and romantic relationships are completely fucking alienating and even outright hostile. Support your comrades folks :flag-aromantic-pride:
For those who would like to learn more but don't have time for reading check out A.K. 47, a podcast by Kristen Ghodsee that goes through Kollontai's writings. Ghodsee also wrote the book "Why Women Have Better Sex Under Socialism: And Other Arguments for Economic Independence." Total comrade
Read Kollontai you nerds. Standardized expressions of love and sexuality are a superstructural product of the economic mode of production, but they are not constructed out of whole cloth. Yes romantic attraction is heavily commodified and alienating in our late capitalist hell, but no it is not a fiction designed to sell valentines cards. Like all things capital exploits, there’s a natural resource there being stolen and sold back to you
Edit: in re-reading this comment I'd like to make an addendum because I feel like it could be misconstrued that I'm not being supportive of aromantic comrades. The normalization of romance as a need is an outcropping of the capitalist mode of production, it justifies the nuclear family as a vehicle of property inheritance and it punishes those who try to exist outside of it. There very well are people who do not experience the need of romantic relationships just as there are people who never experience the need of sexual relationships, etc. I can see the argument that because modern conceptualizations of romance are a construct of the capitalist material reality they're therefore invalid and should be abolished, but abolition rarely means destruction rather than liberation. A liberated 'sex love' dynamic (to use Kollontai's term) would be in the freedom to pursue the relationships that fulfill your needs without the coercion of economic factors like whether a given partner could help you afford a mortgage (because god forbid any given partner isn't your business partner, I mean soulmate). This means freedom to pursue partners who fulfill the needs you do have whether they're sexual, romantic, or just in terms of emotional support, possibly even from multiple partners. So no I wouldn't say romantic feelings are a fabrication of whoever makes those chalk hearts that say "luv u" on them, but aromantic comrades are completely valid in feeling that bourgeois notions of sexual and romantic relationships are completely fucking alienating and even outright hostile. Support your comrades folks :flag-aromantic-pride:
Will always love a comment starting with "read kollontai you nerds"
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Ok I will. What writing of hers should I start with?
Here's an archive of her writings. They're pretty much all bangers but Make Way for Winged Eros has a special place in my heart for situating love/sex as a construct of political economy and tracking its role through history and because it was the thing that got me into her writings. Theses on Communist Morality in the Sphere of Marital Relations is also very good.
For those who would like to learn more but don't have time for reading check out A.K. 47, a podcast by Kristen Ghodsee that goes through Kollontai's writings. Ghodsee also wrote the book "Why Women Have Better Sex Under Socialism: And Other Arguments for Economic Independence." Total comrade
Awesome thanks. Have you read her novel Love for Worker Bees? That was the first thing that popped up when I see her her and I thought it looked good
I haven’t actually, but anywhere’s a good start
Removed by mod