Name_9735i
11mo ago
This is not helpful and unnecessarily personal.
Unnecessarily personal questions invite unnecessarily personal answers. But since you would like to enforce an absurd standard, I will refer to this tech worker as an “it” to satisfy your preference.
Whether or not my response was helpful to it is irrelevant. It did not ask for help. It asked for feedback. And judging by the rest of the feedback it got, I am the only person that isn’t a mediocre tech worker or pussy starved nerd willing to offer it feedback. Some would argue that makes my feedback more helpful than talking to a mirror. Either way, I don’t care if I helped it or not. Judging by the fact that it reported my post, it didn’t actually want honest answers, only commiseration. Which means it posted in bad faith. I expect you to moderate its post in short order for this rules violation.
You seem to have spun up a new account for no other reason than to shit on someone.
I do not keep a “main” account here or anywhere on the internet. I create new accounts every week or so anywhere that requires its participants to self-identify. I am not interested in building relationships with things on the internet. That’s some more impersonal language for you, moderator.
If it were up to me, this website would be anonymous and arguments made here would rest on their own merits, not some contrived and undeserved token of respect afforded to recognizable “community” members. But I didn’t make your website, moderator, so I must work around its design flaws.
It shouldn’t. People are not philosophers, and for much of history, people have not liked philosophers. While Aristophanes is much less famous than the ancient Greek criminal he sought to discredit, his most enduring criticism of philosophy remains woefully irrefutable by the modern secular intelligentsia: if you, O wise philosopher, are so far above the unenlightened masses and their uneducated taboos, then why don’t you simply fuck your mother when you’re horny (or your daughter, if you’d prefer someone younger, O wise philosopher).
People will tolerate challenging taboos to a point, but spend too long questioning why men shouldn’t just rape their daughters for pleasure, and you eventually drink hemlock. The Christians realized this and developed a philosophy with a mythology that catered to the sacred bonds of family, friendship, and romance. Thus they created a dominant culture that is, while surprisingly tolerant, ultimately incapable of challenging the primordial taboos: don’t be a hypocrite, and don’t betray the trust of those that care about you.
To put it more succinctly, you will never get a satisfying, rational justification for why you can’t have sex with your teenage daughter because one doesn’t exist. It is simply ingrained in us to be wrong, probably for the better, and we immediately cast aspersions on anyone that challenges these taboos too eagerly.
More options
Context Copy link