@sun's banner p

sun


				

				

				
1 follower   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 04 20:02:11 UTC

				

User ID: 133

sun


				
				
				

				
1 follower   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 04 20:02:11 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 133

Nobody worries about a purported rape affect in the cases you mentioned because people don't tend to throw around pedo accusations in the same sentence with grooming accusations in those cases.

This lie persists because it is rhetorically useful to progressives, and for no other reason.

If it's a lie, then speak plainly and specify what kind of grooming you're talking about. Right now it looks all too much like a gotcha - shout "grooming pedos, grooming pedos", then smugly proclaim "ah ha, but grooming doesn't just mean 'sexual'!" when people rightfully assume that "grooming" and "pedos" is the same accusation.

As the line goes... if you can be converted to gay by "idpol", you were gay and in the closet, mate. Personally I've noted 0 increase in urges of same-sex sex between my puberty and now.

What is common and annoying is people of different religions assuming that theirs is the true one, with quite scant evidence. Even in spaces that are ostensibly concerned about epistemology.

Purely logically, at least 99 of 100 One True Lord Gods must be fake, or all of them are not as One True as the religions teach.

I would, of course as someone who leans more progressive, argue that however cringe importing social fads from USA is, importing the reaction to said social fads from USA is even more cringe. You're just demonstrating that your own culture really isn't enough for those damn kids.

It may be "fair" on some most basic level of fairness to invoke "your rules applied fairly". But it is not honest, not when you spent all your time speaking out against those rules, while pretending the issue was with the rules and not that it wasn't you applying them.

My main problem with Wokeism is that it really struggles to answer whether it actually delivers what it promises to. A Buddhist monk, a nun, and an EA (as far as I know) have a good sense of what they're getting into and what they'll get from it. In contrast, the effectiveness of woke policies on actually improving the wellbeing of the disadvantaged (what its adherents actually want) runs the entire gauntlet from effective to counter productive, while cultivating a culture that has no qualms about deliberately misrepresenting the empirics.

You really make the comparison on that? Delivering on promises, compared to religions? "The entire gauntlet from effective to counter-productive" is a hell of a lot more "actually delivering on its promises" than Christianity or Buddhism. I've seen minorities treated better and offered opportunities thanks to "wokeism", but I ain't never seen anyone who went to heaven or broke out of Sansara.

What I'm talking about is that when you aim a nuke at Washington DC because that's where all the warmongers of Pentagon and the alphabet sunglasses people sit and they did deserve as much, don't be surprised that the entire USA unites behind the warmongers of Pentagon.

It isn't the word that is the sticking point for me, but its usage (and association with its usage elsewhere) as a broad brush to smear my ingroup with.

I think it's pretty myopic to accuse those who defend/ignore the "drag kids" thing of being conflict theorists, while ignoring how the entire "groomer" label is a conflict theory superweapon being deployed by the conflict-theory part of the right. Were I an American leftist who'd never took a step inside a drag club, or even a Pride parade, my thought process would be something like "I will only disavow this when you stop painting me with the same brush. Otherwise, if you're going to keep implying I'm part of it, well, then I'm part of it. If the penalty for surrendering is death, and the penalty for losing the battle is death..."

Why do you and those like you bother, then? It does look like there are people who aren't convinced by trumped-up accusations who would be convinced by a real malicious act. Or are you tribally aligned enough to treat any real flags from Kiwifarms's side as false flags?

"Some bad habits" sounds like putting it very lightly, if this example of Ngo's reporting is indicative of a pattern.

Well - when looking at the spectrum between "shut down all mention of sexuality and let them figure it out naturally on the wedding night" and "be so open that some people are selling fetish gear to children", what I see is that one extreme is totalizing and bad in itself, while the other's bad parts are the outliers. Much as people here love to mention "kids getting dollars in their underwear in strip clubs", I have never actually encountered people who would endorse that, or endorse similar enough things, in the wild.

It's common advice to "give your children the Talk, or the streets will". Since not all parents follow that advice, I'd rather there be people whose job it is to openly give children the Talk, so they do not have to turn to less official and less scrutinized sources.

Who is being implied in passive voice here? Certainly not me, I'd prefer the Chinese stop being racist. AshLael doesn't appear to be "expecting" the Australians to open up their membership, just stating he is Australian and he does.

What does it matter what their homelands are like? AshLael wasn't claiming the Chinese in China are his people, but that the Chinese in Australia are.

Too many weak men create space for disaster, but who brings it and perpetuates it? You said it yourself: the barbarians or Stalin do.

and whether "thriving" can actually self-sustain such that "survive" is no longer necessary and can be discarded. Is "thrive" simply a rebranding of "eat your seed corn"?

I thought I was rather clear that both extremes are not ideal. Eating your seed corn is the extreme of what I call thrive here.

I am against arbitrary imprisonment, it's just that we're using different definitions of "arbitrary". The word invokes "literally no correlation with any external reasons other than 'we said so'" to me, and to anti-lockdowners, I guess, "when they didn't ask our opinion"? "When it wasn't in response to anything I personally did"? Maybe you can clarify.

I find this whole rhetoric around it reminiscent of "taxation is theft", to which I respond "well then, I support organized theft that doesn't ruin the targets with redistribution towards societal needs and don't support targeted theft that sometimes ruins targets and only enriches the thief".

"progressives believe stupid = bad more than conservatives but conveniently don't think about it" always looked like a sneer to me rather than an accurate assessment. Progressives do think uneducated = bad.

When one uses specifically American right wing shibboleths, I dare say you are importing the reaction and not just saying "none of that here".

To be clear, the animosity may well be local, but the words they use to express it isn't always so.

It's in the same class of responses.

Because it's a minimal preferred alternative to "violently remove him from society".

All I'm hearing are appeals to "it's always been that way therefore it can only be that way" and stridently ignoring all the cases where that principle didn't work, so I suppose we're even. Besides, I wasn't talking about computers or magically inventing FALGSC out of thin air. Medical advancement isn't that fantastical. Certainly not too fantastical to refute conjecture of the "immortality is stagnancy" rate.

Chronos didn't really get along very well with Zeus.

I hold this to be paint-the-bullseye justification of the current state of reality, like a lot of ancestral wisdom.

Doesn't the whole "Heaven" thing require that you die, as opposed to sticking around and possibly, God forbid, start getting ideas of building your own heaven on earth?

Easily accessible post history is a valuable tool for the regular posters. I see no reason to hide it, other that as mentioned making it harder to detect persistent trolling in order to report it.

With that logic you might as well sneer against progressives being against a literal Doomsday Device. "Oh it's just a little progress and science (and it is), why do you hate it?" Or wonder why don't conservatives want to conserve literally everything that ever existed.

No, I mean in the sense of "those whites are acting racist and racists are acting in favor of whites, therefore conflating the labels" like the parent comment said about gay/trans people and pedos.