ThisIsSin
One big family Thanksgiving dinner that never ends
No bio...
User ID: 822
Perhaps most Marxists don't want to abolish the family.
But, most people who want to abolish the family are Marxists.
This is generally because they can't get a family for themselves for some reason, and they want [the qualities that make others able to do that] to be taken away from you and given to them. (Or they're academics.)
The way that's accomplished is to maximize the threat each person in the relationship poses to each other. This can range from most of the basic Western stuff that's "only" financially ruinous- no-fault divorce, alimony, child support- to the more extreme stuff like encouraging children to inform on their parents, separating them entirely Residential Schools-style, or mandating them be grown in a lab and punishing all sex as rape (the Demolition Man/1984 approach). Nobody's gone back to this in the modern age yet, but if they did, it'd look more like [1].
In this way, "the capacity to maintain a family" is redistributed by the State, with those that have it paying more of the bill in the form of needless oppression (as spouses and parents lack the moral hazards the State [as an extension of the people demanding redistribution] has in this matter), while at the same time allowing those with less to escape the consequences of lacking it by having the State exert pressure on the other member(s) in legible, pre-defined ways.
[1] The Harrison Bergeron-style handicapping method for functional families, where you're not allowed to talk to each other beyond an AI intermediate that perfectly mimics your [family member] screaming personalized insults at you for X amount of time before you can listen to whatever else they want to talk to you about. Conversations between couples are ranked based on how much you disagree naturally, so it could be several days before you're allowed to speak a single word to each other, in order to level the playing field for couples that can't do that.
(Actually, AI offers so many other possibilities for the virtue-Marxist; this is just one of them. Imagine a system imposed on you whose sole purpose is to cause you unbearable pain until you've abused your spouse or kid comparable to the State average. It's a handicapper general's, or equity commissioner's, wet dream.)
ThisIsSin
One big family Thanksgiving dinner that never ends
14hr ago
I hope we are not reaching a point where anything feminine, cute, or pretty is immediately seen as sexy.
No, you're only seeing the connection drawn here because:
a.) angry women on the Internet want to Problematize it and equate "men getting to interact with the cute/feminine" = "pedophilia [as the most effective proxy for 'offensive to Female Privilege']"
b.) angry men on the Internet actually did see it as sexy and are crimestop-ing, or are just simping/pretending to for the benefit of the aformentioned angry women
But it seems like an unfortunate side effect of internet memes that anything that can be sexualised will be
Well, it sure beats only one gender having the privilege to determine what is sexual and what is not. That way lies your "don't worry we won't tell your folks; when you're at school, you're a girl"s.
Or, to paraphrase:
Sarah Miller: I wasn't attracted to this, and she is kind of homely. I'm not attracted to butch haircuts or neotenous features, so that means nobody else would ever be either. By the way, I did not get along with the girls when I was in elementary school.
Diana: I was attracted to this, and that made me uncomfortable. This means other people will be attracted to this temptress too, and that's a thoughtcrime and bad. This is especially funny because of where I'm posting this opinion. Anyway, I think pedophiles would choose this one, 100%, even though I just got done explaining about how this looks nothing like an actual kid.
(This is mainly because I don't actually think "pedophilia" has anything to do with actual kids, and is more about policing men around young women, which my mind tells me this is; obviously this here is an attempt to get around that.)
This isn't really that difficult to understand.
ThisIsSin
One big family Thanksgiving dinner that never ends
17hr ago
robbing it of what is supposed to be attractive to a pedo, come to think of it, defeating the point?
Yes, trivially.
However, adult features (and behaviors) on children are what the average person thinks pedos like (re: Cuties, etc.), so they get set off on child beauty pageantry, etc.
Of course, how would said average person ever encounter someone who would point that out, given the room temperature around the topic is so hysterical it [approves of] calling the cops on men out with their daughters?
ThisIsSin
One big family Thanksgiving dinner that never ends
20hr ago
I'll take "telling on myself" for 500, Alex.
ThisIsSin
One big family Thanksgiving dinner that never ends
20hr ago
she's wearing her long hair down, there's this weird contrast between her massive coat and bare legs and feet
Ah yes, she has bare ankles and a coat that's too big for her. How scandalous.
This is just angry women complaining that a young female character doesn't hate the male protagonist, and toxic females wanting to appropriate hobbies and cordon them off for men (everything these types complain about is projection). That's all.
I would have expected more hysteria over the DLC costumes; there's one that's quite a bit more form-fitting (and her hair is tied up and shortened) and as such maps closer to what pedophilia is in the mind of the typical normie.
As for the uoh-posting... the SMM is doing their job well. It's not like that isn't a target audience for the game, and "give people a slightly-edgy meme/emoji to spam in chat and thus annoy streamers on Twitch" is advertising as valuable as any other (perhaps moreso).
But the game isn't really trying to push "you should be sexually attracted to this character", far as I can tell. Of course, I've been busy catching up with my other backlog of games so I haven't had time to sit down and evaluate how cute and/or funny the android actually is yet.
As opposed to, and at the cost of, the father's interests.
"But women > men" is the only real argument here.
More options
Context Copy link