Not ideologically pure.

  • 1 Post
  • 151 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 8th, 2024

help-circle










  • You could read this as a vote for alignment with Russia vs Europe, in which case I completely agree.

    In another reading, it’s a pretty huge decision on changeing the status quo and giving up a significant amount of sovreignity to join a powerful supranational union of states. It’s not necessarily an obvious decision, and reasonable people might vote no.

    I’d argue voting to enter the EU is quite different from voting to leave it, as there will usually be a chunk of relatively reasonable voters who are decently happy with the status quo and reluctant to change it.








  • I don’t think this will be much of a problem for the rest of us, as the users over there will also not be interested in posting in communities where they get fewer interactions. It sounds bad for people who want to start a community at cluball, but unless it somehow gets larger than the rest of the threadiverse combined it’s not really much of a problem for the rest of us.


  • Any reason why they should be defederated, other than “we don’t like closed source around here”?

    I really don’t mind closed platforms being federated as long as it doesn’t hurt the rest of us in any way. If it brings in some users who are drawn in by the interface, that’s great.

    Of course, being a single site it might draw the wrong crowd, and end up having serious moderation problems. In that case of course defederation is a natural choice.


  • A problem is also the idea of “doing it” as the key phrase here.

    What is “it” exactly? Is “it” drugging women and raping them? That might even be fewer than 1/200. I sure as hell hope it is. In either case it’s surely too many - enough that you should never fucking leave your drink unattended.

    Is “it” being a bit lax on consent? She’s drunk, you’re drunk, you’re in bed together, she’s so drunk it’s not really clear what she wants. You made it this far, surely that’s consent enough? In this category of rape, I think there’s a whole lot more than one in two hundred.

    Your partner says she doesn’t feel like it, but you’ll go for it anyway - it’s not like she’s fighting to resist you either? Yeah, a whole lot more than one in two hundred.

    Groping someone in a club when drunk? Hell, we’ve all seen it happen from people we genuinely thought knew better.

    I like to believe that the amount of men who would, say, drug and rape someone, is in a very tiny majority. But as for men willing to make arguments about “blurred lines” where there is none, I’m sadly less optimistic.


  • It’s a great example of why teaching people about consent is important. Some of the men on trial claim they thought it was a consensual kinky game played between husband and wife, and that they were unaware they were raping anybody.

    I don’t expect they will have much success with this argument in court. But it’s the kind of shit one might fall for if one has not received the training to know with immediate certainty that consent is only established by an active yes, never by the lack of a no, and that it needs to be personally gathered by anyone involved in the act. And that without consent, it’s rape.

    It’s fucking obvious, but I can totally see how some people could buy into their claim of good faith and act as if it means something. Not necessarily because they’re bad people, but because they lack the training to understand what consent means and why it’s important.