thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
No bio...
User ID: 1081
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Oh, so when we make Felons a class of people who can't own guns, are we doing something unfair?
If only it were just felons. The various red flag laws gun control advocates keep pushing don't even require a criminal conviction.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Will never, ever happen, for non-immigration related reasons, in the US.
I don't think the resistance is as strong as you think. We're already moving that direction with REAL ID which originally faced stiff opposition for fear of it turning into a national ID card, including states passing laws preventing its implementation, but eventually everyone caved.
I really don't think you want to establish a precedent of labeling message t-shirts "harassment" because you think they are meant to annoy you.
That's already the precedent for men with message t-shirts. EDIT: Or rather, the harassment isn't in the message itself, it's in the fact that simply looking at where the message is written is a social faux pas.
And how exactly would you like women who wear it to be "punished"?
I already said above, they shouldn't be granted the additional protections against "sexual" harassment that women are typically given. They are giving shit, they should expect to deal with it given in return. EDIT: Importantly in this case, if you don't want people staring at your chest, don't put words there.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
I mostly agree with this and would say that both extremes here are bad, but I believe that in the West women are getting away with more than men in this case. For instance, women who wear shirts like this should be recognized as doing so to harass men and such harassment should be punished to a greater extent than it currently is.
OP: "Sometimes I feel paranoid that I might accidentally look in a way that makes someone feel sexually harassed."
You: "So if someone expresses that their constant impulses toward free-floating sexual opportunism with random women are troublesome and uncomfortable to them"
Way to miss the point. The problem isn't men's impulses, it's women being empowered to interpret men's behavior as explicitly sexual even if he doesn't view nor intend it as sexual and use that interpretation to exert power over him via creep shaming or other social bullying. The more we crack down on "creepy" behavior in men, the more we incentivize women to interpret even more innocuous behaviors as creepy in order to abuse that power. Cracking down on sexy dress (EDIT: by saying she "deserves" to be leered at and thus can't exert social power over men if she dresses that way) is one way to dis-incentivize such abuse.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
I find it more like a pub or club that I keep stumbling back to than a home. A wretched hive of scum and villainy as it were.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Girls and women are very clearly told that what we wear makes us responsible for men's behavior towards us.
And men are told that it is fine to creep shame us if what we wear makes women uncomfortable. So which is it? Are people responsible for what they choose to wear or not?
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Your choice in what to wear is expressive speech in the "freedom of speech" sense of the term. Wear whatever you want in private. In public, your choice in what to wear is communication and if your communication is not respectful to those around you then don't expect respect in return.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
The "hungry as heck" bug you? It does me. And he does this throughout the 1st person narrative. Now I don't need swear words to feel realism, but if you want to eliminate epithets, just go without.
To me the use of "heck" rather than a stronger epithet or swear word is indicating that the hunger is significant, but in a safe or comic way rather than a serious one. Similar, I'd view "scary as heck" as describing a safe scare that someone was comfortable with vs "scary as hell/fuck" where I'd be worried that someone was actually seriously scared and possibly in need of support.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Why do you think women fail to realize that men are visually stimulated? We're told this constantly. We're told that if a man acts out, it's because of what a woman wore, how she looked. Sure, men shouldn't rape, but did you see what she was wearing?
Here it is, women's favorite motte and bailey. Yes, if a man rapes a woman he is responsible for it no matter what she is wearing. However, what you wear is signaling. Wearing clothing that draws attention to your sexual characteristics and then complaining when people give you sexual attention (eg, lewding, catcalling) is sexual harassment. On your end. You initiated it, you are responsible for it.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
That is exactly my point. I'm not saying men's and women's nipples should or shouldn't be treated the same, I'm saying that the difference in treatment @Stingray3906 was asking about is tied to social expectations placed on others. You can't change one without the other.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Men don't get scrutinized for their nipples being visible in public. Why should women?
Women don't get in trouble for leering at men's nipples when they are visible in public, no matter how uncomfortable it makes the men. Women can have the same "freedom" to expose themselves when they give up the power to sexualize and punish men's gaze.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
I'm not aware of any helpful published surveys supporting this, but to my mind the counter-narrative where Southern patriarchs eagerly guard the honor of their random enslaved field hands is making the more extraordinary claim.
They presumably wouldn't have been guarding the honor of their "random enslaved field hands" so much as their productivity. A slave was an investment. Part of that investment particularly for female slaves was breeding potential. An unexpected pregnancy with unknown paternity eats into that investment.
Given the overall attitude to women of that class, why would they be believed and avenged rather than punished for causing trouble and/or assumed to have themselves been the seducers?
Slaves were property and damaging the property of the elite is generally not tolerated regardless of whether or not they actually cared about the women.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
HexCasting has a few built-in ways to store spells, and most of the time people will just load three or four spells down and never have to use a wand again.
I really like the looks of this. It reminds me greatly of the spellcasting from Arx Fatalis, which I was disappointed to see wasn't replicated and expanded on in other games. Now if only I hadn't just started GTNH...
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Ah, I missed that he flamed out. I thought you meant he literally asked to be banned and was very confused since neither his user page nor the mod log indicated he had been.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Now? Hasn't he been relatively inactive since before the move from reddit?
First, it is possible to offer things other than the opportunity for sex, particularly in the case of pedophilia where the social stigma is extreme. For instance, I would very likely lose my job were I to be doxxed and my employer made aware of my being attracted to kids despite my work not involving any interactions with children. I would not particularly like to lose my job, so making it illegal to fire me just because of that attraction is a nice carrot. Various other forms of de-stigmatization are similarly effective.
Second, some of the methods they currently use to exploit straight male sexuality are very compatible with pedophiles, perhaps even more effectively than with straight men generally. Back on reddit /u/FPHthrowawayB noted
3. This is just my theory, but in addition to pedos being sexually attracted to children, I do think their sexuality is also more child-like. I'm sure you can remember a time when you would have been more interested in seeing up a girl's skirt than seeing her have sex, if you even knew what that was. I think many pedos are still partially stuck in that developmental phase sexually.
I base this on the notion that pedos' interest in NN content is still more than you'd expect even given the complications in acquiring the alternative. Compare it to, for example, zoophiles, who also face similar complications but almost always still share exclusively sexually explicit content as opposed to simply softcore (since animals are rarely pictured "non-nude" of course).
Why crack down on sexualized imagery in media, but not on women and girls behaving that way IRL? Because the former serves men and the latter exploits them.
EDIT: Grammar.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
As with straight male sexuality more generally, they have no wish to destroy pedophilia. Their desire is to exploit it to coerce pedophiles into supporting them in various ways.
That's because you are not working with an array in the second case, merely a pointer to an int. You can often use such a pointer in an array-like fashion if it points to an element of an array, but since you are just referencing the element and not the whole array you don't have access to type information about the array. You could get an array that knows its size with something like int (*array)[n] = malloc(sizeof(int[n]));, but that is not common usage.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Arrays, including dynamically sized VLAs, always know their size in C and it can be queried with sizeof. You just need access to the actual array type. What you can't do is lookup the array type, and thus the size, after it has been type erased via pointer decay.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
I think this is primarily about controlling the culture of education. There are a lot of religious schools in MN and there is a lot of tension between them and the DFL. See also the ban on banning books that doesn't actually ban banning books.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Men are harassed more. Women suffer from gendered harassment more, the definition of which is designed specifically to make women suffer from it more in order to be able to dismiss the harassment men face.
thrownaway24e89172
naïve paranoid outcast
3mo ago
Meanwhile, I could look over at the high school boys team and say, "They are going through the exact same training regimen as myself, I'm even practicing in the same lane as some of them, but their race times are still faster than mine. Sexual dimorphism is weird."
Sure. Now think of how boys who have physical development issues feel when they put in more effort than said girls, get less results because of their development issues, and are then told "tough luck, you lost the genetic lottery" while they see the girls who didn't work as hard as them celebrated. I have no problems with the existence of women's leagues. I only take issue with the lack of humility some people exhibit in demanding to be considered the equal of people who they have explicitly excluded from competing with them while sneering at those with other types of disadvantage.
No, I demand that they be explicitly recognized as a carve out for people who can't cut it otherwise instead of some kind of deserved response to perceived unfairness that some disadvantaged people are entitled to. I see the whole argument of whether or not to allow trans-women to participate as a red herring, as it ignores the fact that the choice of exactly which people who would badly lose in an open tournament instead get to stand up and pretend to be among "the best in the world" is arbitrary anyway. EDIT: If it is truly about "fair" competition, then there should be no problems facing off against trans-women or even men who perform at the same level. That there is a desire to exclude shows this is entirely about the resulting status.
From the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women:
If a woman can unilaterally decide to abort or carry her baby to term, can men truly be said to have the same right to "to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of their children" if all he can do is try to persuade her?
More options
Context Copy link