Just looking at the title, I have nothing nice to say about this article. Another sighted person talking over us like we're more/less than any other normal human being.

It's unfortunate that this sighted philosopher believes that he has the authority to speak about the experiences of blind people. It is even more unfortunate that this essay is based entirely on a theoretical understanding of love with no actual examples of blind people who have fallen in love. I personally find the argument that a blind person does not have a sexuality completely absurd.

This article is bad.

You were title isn’t very accurate of what this essay was trying to say, although I can forgive you for thinking so because this whole thing read like a B Grade intro to philosophy college paper The author wasn’t talking about any actual blind human being. Critiquing this really isn’t worth the mental effort that it would take, but this thing just rubbed me the wrong way so much I had to at least say I didn’t like it

Blind man here.

While my very first crush was on a voice (I vividly remember this one girl coming and singing and playing guitar for the crowd of around 500 of us with her father, and then figuring out that her and her family lived in my home town and then doing nothing about it because I was too shy and she was two years older than I)

I still think that there's a lot more to the visually impaired and blind boy's experience of love than just voice and scent.

While feeling someone's face is an absolute myth, the blind man through locker room chats with his friends and through research can still have a good idea of what physical aspects appeal to him (e.g. I have not touched many breasts but I have a strong feeling that I would prefer larger ones to smaller ones)

I do look for sense of humour and hobbies in common and warmth of personality before I chase after physical attributes but they are something that is present on everyone's mind.

This author has never spoken to a blind person in their life, have they?

This article made me feel wrong. I wanted to think it’s satire but it’s not.

I’d recommend the author speaks to a blind person and takes it down and rewrites it if they wish to with a better understanding.

Well that’s the most asinine thing I’ve read all day, and yet somehow, not the most asinine thing this guy has ever written.. browsing down the list of other things he’s written is a clear defense of and justification for rape, so yeah, just an all-around great guy.
I should clarify, it is clear that the author does not understand love and has never met a blind person, and yet that isn’t the thing that offends me so much. While the author wishes to examine love through a philosophical lens, it is abundantly clear that he has failed to examine it through literally any other. The philosophical vomit that passes for thought, completely fails to understand the nature of sexuality and sexual attraction, to the extent that one has to wonder if they’ve ever picked up a biology book of any kind. The author opines that philosophy in the modern age is on it’s deathbed, but if this is an example of philosophy in the modern age, then perhaps we should look into euthanasia. Philosophy at its best involves people asking questions in an attempt to understand the nature of existence, and to try and understand why people do what they do, but in this case all the author is doing is wallowing in their own preconceptions, in an attempt to justify their beliefs and pass it off as philosophical thought, when it rises to the level of neither philosophy nor thought.