There’s no division: I also think the USA is currently a threat to world peace.

Ohh~ I can feel my hatred for the westboro baptist church building up. Once it bubbles over, I’m going to hit super saiyan III.

This line of inquiry can’t go anywhere because the answer Monotheist will give to every question is that an objective answer does exist, it’s ordained by god himself, and conveniently lines up with whatever his feelings on the matter are anyway.

You know what’s interesting, though. Monotheist will talk about how we, people, are fallible and sometimes get morality wrong, without acknowledging that this fallibility forces us into a relativistic morality regardless of whether or not an objective one actually exists. And that’s because you’re supposed to read The Bible. Famously impervious to reinterpretation The Bible.

To anyone who still needs to know: When Monotheist says “reality is objective and deeper than narratives,” they’re referring to God. God is the objective morality they’re talking about.

I don’t know if they would try deny this here, but I have seen them say it explicitly elsewhere.

So yes, their username is relevant.

Just adding to aMockTie here: I love math, a math-lover, if you will, and I don’t find the incompleteness theorem disappointing, I find it incredibly interesting and captivating. It’s like learning that black holes are real. It gives me the same feeling that watching superfluids in chemistry flow up their containers do.

The fact that the universe conspires to keep us ignorant is so goddamn interesting.

You’re welcome 🫡

The “guy” would be Shein.

Another neat way to frame the debate, to reach for the obvious example, is over swastikas. Of course, having a picture of a swastika tattooed on your arm isn’t harming anyone, so why should we as a society have any distaste for it?

To answer “we shouldn’t” is to cede ground to nazis. We do not, actually, have to tolerate their symbols.

The 4chan-nazi pipeline—yes, I’m still talking about pedophiles—if you’re not aware, is a strategy by which people are drenched in ironic, nazi iconography, which results in them being more permissive of that kind of thing, and thus makes them much, much easier to be groomed by king-master klansman, or whatever they call themselves.

Being too permissive of something is socially harmful.

I agree, pedophiles are often villainized way too much. I would like them not to be so afraid of being found out that they never get therapy. If they’re good people, I assume they want to be better as much as I want them to, even if it’s difficult. None of this means we need to sell dolls to them.

Think about it this way: I watch pornography all the time. I am not any less likely to fuck a woman. How is the doll supposed to satiate them?

I realize that I sound very condescending right now, but I’m sincerely asking: this idea that a legal outlet is actually more helpful to them, where does this come from? Does it even make sense?

Whether you mean to or not, I think that you are ceding ground to people who want pedophilia to be more popular. They do exist: middle America loves child marriage. This is why I’m not engaging with the personal freedom angle; it’s not really relevant.

Also, requiring child dolls to have some dimension by which they are clearly identifiable as adults is an effective ban on child dolls—it’s the same thing.

I think there may be some social issues with a for-profit company being financially incentivized to promote and sell pedophilia to people.

How would you rather deal with this? A boycott? Do you have money in child sex doll manufacturing that you can withhold?

So he can think of it as a child in his head.

That’s not really what this is about. You’re trying to assess this on a personal freedom level when what we’re talking about is a guy with a megaphone.

The threat of AI is not that it will be more human than human. It is that it will become so ubiquitous that real people are hard to find.

I couldn’t find many real people.

Are you sure that I’m real?

That’s not what imaginative means.

If you’d like an example of AI being exceptionally boring to look at, though, peruse through any rule 34 site that has had its catalogue overrun with AI spam: an endless see of images that all have the same artstyle, the same color choices, the same perspective, the same poses, the same personality; a flipbook of allegedly different characters that all. look. fucking. identical.

I’m not joking: I was once so bored by the AI garbage presented to me, I actually just stopped jerking off.

If you people would do something interesting with your novelty toy, I would be like 10% less mad about it.

The CIA will not allow me to answer this question.
However, I do have complementary Skittles.

What part of “I put no time into it” do you not understand?

Considering AI is really unlikeable, I don’t think that’ll be too hard.

I generated it, actually, and I put no time into it whatsoever.

Tom Cruise. But, plug

Ohhh, okay. I see how it is.

Perfect.

As an allegedly misandrist, man-feminist critical of Men’s culture broadly, I am telling you this: these are the only two things you need to believe in.

I am tasking you with the responsibility of simply wanting a better society. If you see any person being harassed or chauvenistic or socially ignored because they’re not “in the club,” man or woman, and no matter the debate on which demographics tend to do what more often—if you have the heroic urge to help someone, that’s all you need.

This might sound a bit like I’m asking you to do something you already do, but if that’s true, that’s even better! A lot of people out there think of themselves as heroes but are easily swept away from the call to action by things like the bystander effect or simply not wanting to rock the boat. I believe in your ability to stand up and help people.

Also, I am surprised by your straightforwardness. I appreciate that, lol. :)

Every time he succeeds in womanizing a victim, he has more reasons to stay the same

Okay. Let’s not let him succeed, then.

They are also for keeping ne’er-do-wells away from harming others.

Yes, this is why prison is not an unsupervised room in your own house.

You think the woman can change to be more responsible…
but you don’t think the man can change to be less irritating.

Pulido, if you don’t believe bad people can change, why bother with a society that keeps prisoners at all? Why not just kill them?

“people should be accountable for the actions of other people in the same demographic”,

Sudneo! Answer these questions:

Do you agree that stalking women is bad behavior?

If you discovered a person who was stalking a woman, would you seek to intervene?

Don’t yadda-yadda about what the argument was to me—I don’t care. I want the answers to these two questions.

And also start educating the average, shitbag womanizer males to not be that. We could teach them to be normal.