ObjectivityIncarnate

People are really bad at discussing political topics without getting all riled up

Understatement of the century, lol. And social media’s influence has only exacerbated the overall polarization/radicalization, making civil discussion in that area feel like even more of a pipe dream as time goes on.

we can’t know how many also choose to escalate because of these outlets.

But we do know that in general, porn doesn’t elicit that kind of escalation into real life. If this particular category of porn did cause that, it’d literally be a total outlier.

Same with other media, too. Rape porn lovers aren’t statistically more likely to rape irl, violent video game lovers aren’t more likely to be violent irl, etc., compared to the general population.

So I think it’s pretty fair to hypothesize that, if anything, it would reduce the incidence of real-world offense. Just look at the massive negative correlation between the proliferation of porn (thanks to the Internet), and the overall incidence of rape.

Also, I’m familiar with one bit of evidence out of Japan that apparently showed that child molesters consume less porn than the average citizen, which I was definitely surprised to learn, but once you think about it in the context of the stuff I mentioned above, it actually makes perfect sense.

In all likelihood, fictional ‘simulations’ like LLMs will directly reduce the incidence of CSA, if anything. If that’s the case, I can’t oppose such things in good conscience–it’d be pretty narcissistic to put my personal disgust over even a single kid not getting bad touched.

Played it with my SO, reached a certain scene that completely warped the tone of the game (I’m guessing you know which one I mean), and neither of us really have had the urge to play since.

Also, both parents are kinda unlikable as characters imo, lol.

Hell, I don’t even want to ban users guilty of piracy.

Yeah, if someone shoplifts from a store, the punishment/penalty should not involve confiscating the car they drove to the store, lol.

The not-so-subtle misogyny of equating adult women with children, depriving them of all agency, strikes yet again.

It’s not victim blaming because he’s not referring to the same women you are. Like it or not, there are plenty of women (no one is saying it’s all or most women, by the way) who will pursue rich men with the desire for a purely transactional “I’ll fuck you so I can have your wealthy lifestyle and/or a part of your fame.” They’re perfectly content with that arrangement, as are said men.

Johnny Depp’s girlfriends for decades have basically all been women in this category, even now that he’s way past his prime aesthetically. The women accusing Trump of sexual impropriety are, obviously, NOT in this category.

Women are not a hivemind–different types of them can exist in the same society, you know.

He was tried and found guilty of raping a woman.

That’s not true. He’s never been convicted of a sex crime. “Found liable” in a civil court and “found guilty” in a criminal court are VASTLY different, and require VASTLY different standards of evidence.

It’s important to be accurate.

My man I don’t think I give a shit where you think I belong.

show me some billionaires that never took advantage of anyone to get their billions

You can’t prove a negative, screwball. It’s literally impossible to prove “never took advantage of anyone” about anyone, billionaire or not.

Not that you aren’t almost certainly using an overbroad definition of ‘take advantage’, on top of it.

I’m down to change my view.

No, you aren’t. People who are don’t play these kinds of semantic games.

I just don’t see getting to a billion without someone being taken advantage of on the way though.

Just because you don’t understand doesn’t mean it’s false.

Which of course is a stupid comparison indicative of economic ignorance, because wealth does not grow linearly for anyone who doesn’t stuff their money under a mattress.

no

That’s because you’re a textbook example of the infantile minds infecting areas where actual discourse has a chance to happen.

Atheism isn’t a religion, likewise asexuality is not a sexual orientation, but the lack of one, I say.

(emphasis added)

Men aren’t allowed to discuss their feelings because men have created a society that looks at them as losers for doing so.

The implication here, that societal norms are created and maintained by only men, and therefore any aspects of it that affect men negatively deserve to be blamed on them, is one of the most pervasive anti-male sentiments that people try to fly under the radar with. Women have at least as much (arguably more) influence on societal norms and conventions, as men do.

This entire comment is teeming with this undertone; that is, until the end, when they come out and just say ‘all the bad stuff is men’s fault’ at the end, lol.

Everyone loves building strawmen. If you think only “they” do it, it’s because you’re unquestioningly accepting the ones that confirm your biases.

sacking hundreds of actually productive employees.

If they were “actually productive”, sacking them would hurt the bottom line, not help it.

You lot are constantly talking about how workers are uniformly short-changed on their labor by their employers, underpaid for it and therefore being a profit source for employers, but you never explain why any business would do layoffs like this if that was the case, lol. Do these people who got laid off make the company money or not?

70% of that $2.4 million should have been taxed

It’s literally post-tax income already, lol.

Literally just look at JK Rowling’s twitter feed

You’re projecting your terminal online-ness onto the general population. The vast, vast majority of Harry Potter, or any book series, fans, pay z-e-r-o attention to the personal Twitter account of the author.

Accusing that huge majority of being transphobic just for that is moronic, full stop.