81–90 of 114 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
There is no logic in Nathan’s argument - only a facade of logic designed to justify his misogyny. He constructs a false trichotomy where every “choice” serves only to strip women of their rights or autonomy. That’s not reason - that’s prejudice dressed up in pseudo-rational language. You cannot reason someone out of a position they didn’t arrive at through reason. Nathan’s view is not a logical conclusion - it’s a pr…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The struggle between personal agency and duty is a familiar theme in Asian literature, where duty usually wins. When you’re dealing with a literal extinction event what takes priority?
In Western liberal democracies, individual freedom always wins. Given that the World is currently over-populated by almost every metric imaginable, and we are facing an extinction event as a result, I think you can hold back on your demand that we enslave women for a few thousand more years, yet.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
If you ever think the solution to a problem is to remove agency and freedom from an entire group of people, you have not found a workable solution, you're just trying to push away blame from those who are ultimately responsible. I sincerely hope your comment is satire or sarcasm. It doesn't land that way, it just reads as misogynistic, uncaring and divorced from the modern world.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
SK has been ‘crazy’ this way for many decades. It’s also why it is so obsessed with plastic surgery. Japan has been going in a similar direction, but has some notable differences (tentacle porn really is a thing, as is chibi). Everyone is just becoming more aware of it, which hey - at least it isn’t just all about the USA anymore!
Japan isn’t actually going in that direction… as far as I can tell, there’s just a ton of “Japan is so weird” articles that get shared in the west. Like, articles about vending machines that sell used panties to perverts, or men who get married to anime characters. You could just as easily write these articles about the US or any country in Europe, it’s just a bit of old-fashioned orientalism going around that we hap…
Every culture has their variant of this.
For example, Indians would never tolerate the level of alcohol consumption that is essentially mandatory to hold office jobs in SK and Japan.
And SK and Japan wouldn’t (to my knowledge) tolerate the level of societal control over marriages/sex/personal identity that Indian culture considers normal. And definitely wouldn’t tolerate the lack of civic sense.
Chibi was an indirect reference to what western cultures refer to as CSAM (in not-as-uncommon-as-outsiders assume cases). Too subtle eh?
Do you want me to get more specific? It’s not like Akiba and several other nearby distracts are actually about just maid cafes (actual-what-they-purport-to-be ones anyway) and cheap electronics, eh?
Every culture has things like this, yes. And the bizarre (to the reader) and outrageous (to the reader) articles get clicks.
I understand the laws against distribution, but can anyone explain why creating/possessing deep-faked porn for private use is so morally reprehensible or even criminal? I can't identify a victim in this scenario. Whose business is it? I genuinely couldn't care less if someone did this "to" me, but then I recognise that as a middle aged dude that's not ever happening so I may have a blind spot here. How would I even k…
And the harm comes from sharing this material. So stopping people from possessing it as with lot of other material is not worse way to stop spread. Defence of I did not create it is not usable anymore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no logic in Nathan’s argument - only a facade of logic designed to justify his misogyny. He constructs a false trichotomy where every “choice” serves only to strip women of their rights or autonomy. That’s not reason - that’s prejudice dressed up in pseudo-rational language. You cannot reason someone out of a position they didn’t arrive at through reason. Nathan’s view is not a logical conclusion - it’s a pr…
[flagged]
It is an incredible coincidence that every time I hear this, the unpleasant situation happens to be fixable by just tearing away a few more individual rights, which will surely be back once the unpleasant situation is gone and not replaced by five more unpleasant situations
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is no logic in Nathan’s argument - only a facade of logic designed to justify his misogyny. He constructs a false trichotomy where every “choice” serves only to strip women of their rights or autonomy. That’s not reason - that’s prejudice dressed up in pseudo-rational language. You cannot reason someone out of a position they didn’t arrive at through reason. Nathan’s view is not a logical conclusion - it’s a pr…
[flagged]
> “We are in an unpleasant situation. It’s probably going to require an unpleasant solution.”
Well, as you’ve decided that basic human rights are now “optional,” let me propose a solution:
Since misogynists like you and Nathan are clearly a threat to women’s safety and comfort — and since women’s safety is essential for building the kind of secure, family-oriented society you claim to care about — why don’t we abolish your right to life instead? Start a misogynist elimination programme.
It would immediately reduce the threats women face, which are far more immediate and real than the hypothetical societal collapse you keep waving around.
Or does the idea of sacrificing your own rights to “fix” society not sit as comfortably with you as sacrificing those of women?