Absolutely it is not universal, but that’s… kind of the problem.
Porn isn’t that big of an issue either way. Left-wing movements can take a stance on whatever side of it. The problem is when issues like this end up being targeted at some portions of the left-wing spectrum but not to others and you end up with a split down the middle that one or both sides decide to make into a dealbreaking issue.
Hey, if you just happen to be a run of the mill traditional prudish conservative that would actually be mildly heartening. I genuinely don’t care about those continuing to run that line.
Still not wrong about the underlying issue, though. And for the record, I don’t think anti-porn so-called “abolitionists” are “my enemy”. I think all left of center forces are my allies, personally. The problem is single issue wedges used as hostile propaganda do work, as seen very clearly in the case of trans issues.
I, once again, did not say or imply that I am persecuted in any way.
I do think porn is free expression, of sexuality and otherwise, and should be protected about as much as any other form of free expression. Which is not universally and without limit, before you try that one.
And all of that is not the same as saying I “can’t stand criticism” about it. Which I didn’t say or think. I will actively, aggressively criticise actual porn, both as a media product and as an industry.
Once again, the strawmanning and talking points aren’t doing much to disprove the notion that anti-porn activism will become the new TERF-like trojan horse wedge among ostensible leftist movements going forward. People don’t like to talk about those, but they are bad and this is incoming.
That’s a cool argument you’re having with a thing nobody said.
Educating children about sex in general is educating children about sex (and nobody here has argued against it or equated it with being anti-porn).
There is a rising trend in European lefitsm, and particularly in European feminism, that argues that all porn is inherently pernicious and ultimately should not exist.
Note those are two separate statements.
You definitely dabbled in the second of those statements when you claimed that “that [can’t] be considered safe for anyone”. Whether you meant to say what you said is in your head, but as presented that slope is both mighty slippery AND very consistent with some of the very anti sex-work trend I’m talking about. The false equivalence and misquote at the top of your response doesn’t lead me to believe you’re treating this “objectively”, either.
Waaay better than the porn bans and online age verification schemes, honestly.
I question why this is just for “children who show mysoginistic behavior”, though. Sex ed should be universal, and this should be a major part of sex ed.
I assume the fear here is parents complaining about their kids being talked about porn, which may end up being a larger underlying issue than the porn itself. I guess you just have to trust that education professionals handle the opportunity well and this doesn’t become a stern talking to for problem kids, which is likely to do as much as stern talking tos have done historically.
“Young humans” sure. Not young humans, you absolutely do you.
There’s a bit of an emerging trend in leftist European circles in particular that sees porn as inherently patriarchal and wrong and we’re not ready for how much anti-porn is going to be the new terfism yet. This is going to suck a lot, and not in a good way.
There are boys in trousers in the picture, though. And no real “short” skirts.
I mean… you do you, but some of this may be an eye of the beholder situation.
For the record, not an American. Which, you know, I thought was obvious from my post, but hey.
I’d add that there’s a difference between caring about outcomes and not having values but, honesly, this is not a conversation worth having.
It takes a prodigious amount of entitlement to look at things that way. The leap of logic from a tangible action to… some other thing that happened requires keeping the loosest possible tally and looking at international politics strictly from the lens of how it affects your worldview, rather than the actual impact on the ground.
No, my dear online performative leftist, the US deciding to reverse their policy and cut tens of billions of international aid is not “the same” as whatever war, political stance or act of interference you vaguely remember being mad about a decade ago. They can both be bad without both being the same.
I mean, never mind that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were started by Bush, in turn the proto-Trump that opened the door for the fascist base to encroach on the US right, the fact that those things happened doesn’t mean that the new, different thing Trump did that none of his predecessors did isn’t worse than what their predecessors were doing. The people that relied on US aid relied on US aid, independently of whatever US tanks were doing thousands of kilometers away.
Trump also reversed policy regarding Israel, incidentally, with the recognition of Jerusalem and moving the embassy. That’s the type of false equivalence that led to him being in power in the first place. Because man, I was not on board with Biden’s stance on Palestine, and I am sure Harris would have been way too lenient with Israel for my tastes, but if you think that’s the same as openly suggesting mass displacement for the sake of turning Gaza into a tourist resort and that it made no diplomatic difference in how fast and what type of ceasefire could have been attained you’re out of your mind.
And this is the last I say about it. I have zero patience for this type of willful ignorance in general, but I also have no energy to be angry. Thanks for the reminder that leaving even a tiny crack for US politics, even if it’s coming from the left, is way too much. The entire thing is toxic. Malign actor indeed.
Buuuullshit.
Utter garbage.
Extremely nope.
It takes deliberate ignorance to reach that conclusion. Forget the cuts in aid, which an article two posts up the chain here was directly linking to a worsening of cholera in South Sudan, the notion that anybody in Brazil or Mexico is going “I can’t tell the difference” is ludicrous. Your mileage may vary on whether Trump invading Venezuela is a good or a bad thing, but I’m pretty sure the regime there isn’t going “same thing, really”.
I guess the Argentitian government would say things are better now, considering they just got bailed out in what amounts to buying a midterm election. In that case I’d wager it’s the opposition who doesn’t find things were just as bad a couple years ago.
What the hell do you have to be on to think only Europe has noticed open fascists being in charge in the US. This is why I’ve been taking a break from this place, holy crap.
Hah. Shocked that you didn’t just take the easy way out and wrote “salt to taste”.
…
Please do not use recipes from AI summaries without clicking through to the correct amounts.
I mean, hell, I won’t use a recipe I find on a recipe site without cross-referencing at least a couple other recipes from other sites, because some of those are janky as hell. But the best-guess of a summarization LLM on what all those numbers and ratios are meant to be? Yeah, no. Not by itself at all, unless you’re just trying to jog your memory on something you already know and can recognize the correct values if you see them.
I mean, “now” is doing a lot of load-bearing work in that sentence, but it’s also hard to argue it isn’t markedly worse than it used to be.
I guess unless you’re Russia and their circle. I’m starting to wonder about China, too, considering the geopolitical wedgie they’re giving the US right now.
The government isn’t a subscription service or a company.
I can’t deal with Americans’ ultracapitalist perspective on the res publica. It’s so annoying.
I nean… it’s a labelling thing, presumably. They don’t want milk substitutes to be labelled “milk” so they can’t advertise as easily as a milk substitute on supermarket shelves, and presumably the same is true for meat substitutes, except this goes at a glacial pace and they tried and failed in 2020 when it was still relevant and now they’re trying again even though nobody cares about veggie burgers anymore.
You are presuming this sort of arcane manipulation of collective weirdness into multinational legislation follows human logic, and that way lies madness. Best you can do is steer it ever so slightly so it at least does something in the aggregate that stops some anarchocapitalist loon from privatizing oxygen or whatever. It’s been a very weird century.
Look, like I said, it’s not you and it’s not about whether you’re agreeing or disagreeing with me.
I think at this point I’m just disappointed at the concept of social/user generated media as a whole. Straws and and camels and all that.
I am so furious with this at this point.
And the problem is, I also get what’s going on. You all feel cool and proud and self-actualized with the whole thing where you moved to Linux and whatnot. And you really, really, really want to tell somebody about it. I get it. It’s social media.
It’s fine the first few times, but it piles up after a while, you know? You can only have somebody veer sharply to the left towards “I use Linux, by the way” so many times.
Nobody asked if it was a dealbreaker for you. That didn’t happen. And even if someone did it’s not relevant to the conversation we’re having. We know.
Look, again, it’s not you. It’s just that hanging out around this place and trying to engage with the issues can get to be really weird after a while.
Not really, it’s more of a farmer’s lobby protecting animal products from vegetarian alternatives.
Which as someone else says below is a bit neutral and doesn’t do much, but hey. They did it to milk.
Guessing it’s some bargaining chip with the industry on the wider legislation they’re passing? This stuff is pretty byzantine. European agricultural industries are constantly on the verge of setting stuff on fire. It’s a full time job to be even vaguely aware of what’s going on with them.
I’m confused. What is “not accepting” a MS account to set up Windows? I mean, if you don’t have to use Windows and that is a dealbreaker for you, then great.
But if you need to use Windows and you want to… you know… work… around… having to be logged in, he’s suggesting a way to do that. That’s what we call in the business “a workaround”.
As I said elsewhere, I get that people want this to be a dealbreaker, or the suggestion to be a pointless defense because this is a Linux community and there is a cultural pressure to pretend that the account problem is a massive dealbreaker (as opposed to most normies just going with it, just like they do on their phones, which is what actually happens), but OSs aren’t football teams. You can both criticise MS for having an online activation requirement, rightfully so, and acknowledge a potentially useful mitigation for anybody who needs or wants to use the OS without being constantly logged in.
It… kinda sounds like judgement.
So what happens to… you know, Uber drivers, software engineers for social media and Amazon drivers? Because there’s a biiig spectrum of work under capitalism, and it doesn’t fit particularly neatly in “selling your body” or “helping people”.
Look, nobody is saying that sex work can’t be exploitative or even that it’s not generally exploitative. The legal gray areas and general ickiness of the entire space is… a lot, and I think it needs specific regulation. But to take it as a uniquely patriarchal, capitalistic thing distinct from “normal” work requires not seeing it as proper labor, but as inherently… well, they do kind of abuse the word “abolition” very pointedly.
That has a long, nasty tradition with pretty unhealthy side effects, honestly.
In any case, that’s the rhetorical trick I’m worried about. You let the right own sex work AND you let the stance on this split feminist/leftist spaces in half and you’ve manufactured a mix of TERFism and the concession of “free speech” as a fascist talking point. It’s a political problem more than a policy problem, frankly.