A buddhist vegan goth with questionable humour.
I don’t understand this, can you explain it?
In the left I see a black and blue dress with a yellow box. The dress inside the box is still black and blue (with yellow tint).
In the right side I see a white and gold dress with a blue. box. Inside the box the dress is white and gold, with a blue tint.
What am i supposed to see here? What is this telling me?
We have a law in German that you can opt out of advertisement on the mail by putting a sticker on to your mailbox that states “No Advertising”. Companies have to respect it or will be fined.
I wish there was a “No advertisement please” sticker for my inbox too, but a junk filter will have to do.
Thanks. That’s actually one of my own words, but you can use it all you want if you wish to do so.
My steppairents are like this and beeing with them, at a meal table, and have nobody say anything for 20 Minutes is so fucking wired. I am getting used to it, but it’s still off as fuck.
So yeah, complex issue. Thanks for your valuable contribution.
On the contrary, I was happy to engage with a position that wasn’t along the lines of “all pedophiles should commit suicide”.
It is, as you say, a complex issue. That complexity and any nuance is usually absent of discussions about the topic on the Internet. Thanks for adding it here.
That’s the problem with drugs, no?
When you can stop you don’t want to, and when you want to stop, you can’t.
I don’t remember where I read it, but I think it summs it up perfectly.
Do you have any real-world or professional experience with people suffering from pedophilia?
I have been schooled on pedophilia in a professional context, during my undergrad and in a work-context. Yet I have not worked with pedophiles directly, nor have I had any contact to one, that I would be aware of.
Looking at the science both of our positions are reflected. As with so many things the answer is not a simple “yes” or “no”.
If you want to take a bit of a deep dive, I recoment this study from 2023.
It looked at both of our positions: FSM (Fantasy Sexual Material) leads to real sexual violence against children vs. FSM reduces the risk of said practice.
Here is their summary of my position (FSM leads to sexual violence against children):
When applying the motivation-facilitation model to the context of FSM use, it can be theorized as to why, for a subset of users, engaging with such material could become problematic and increase the likelihood of committing a child sexual offense (whether that be offline or online), while for others this is not the case. As pedohebephilia is thought to be a motivating factor towards sexual offending in Seto’s model [21], engaging with FSM relating to children could heighten sexual arousal and therefore act as a facilitator to increase offending likelihood. With abstinence from masturbation being self-reported as a risk-management technique by some people who are attracted to children [16], this is a recognized idea by some members of the community. Over time, engaging in CSEM (especially forms such as child-like sex dolls, which offer a more realistic sexual experience) may contribute to the development of offence-supportive beliefs and the adoption of implicit theories about the acceptability of engaging in sexual activity with children (or child-like targets). The combination of enhanced sexual arousal to children (a potential motivator of offending), coupled with the development of permission-giving beliefs (facilitators of offending), may subsequently increase the risk of abuse being committed by somebody with attractions to children.
Here they are summarising your position, as far as I understand it (FSM helps to prevent sexual child abuse):
Alternatively, FSM use could be seen as beneficial by the motivation-facilitation model and instead reduce the likelihood of offending. Rather than heightening arousal, FSM could act as a safe sexual outlet that allows for a feeling of release and sense of catharsis [84], which could reduce a motivation to seek out real children as a sexual partner. Engaging with FSM also avoids the problematic suppression of sexual interests, with such suppression being linked to increases in self-perceived risks for offending among those with attractions to children [15]. In contrast to Stevens and Wood [16], Houtepen and colleagues reported that engagement in masturbatory fantasies was a common coping mechanism used by some people experiencing attractions to children, avoiding the need to access CSEM due to an alternative outlet being identified [3•].
They conclude, basicly, that more research is needed:
Given the present lack of understanding of FSM and how they are used, it is important to identify the factors associated with use and whether they are risk-enhancing or risk-reducing (i.e., protective). This knowledge could be beneficial to clinicians in the search for more effective methods to support people who are attracted to children when they are seeking help to manage their sexual interests. Nonetheless, Seto’s motivation-facilitation model provides a theoretical framework for thinking about this topic in a more nuanced way [21].
So, there we are. A long post to say maybe.
I suppose both of our positions might be viable and it can’t be said yet, under what circumstances each one of us might be right.
My brain defaults to this if I feel the need to fill silence with sound.
The “video games cause violence” argument is wrong, because the vast majority of gamers don’t try to use games as a substitute action for violent behaviour.
But there are of cause at least some mass murderers and school shooters, that have played violent games in order to fulfill their violent phantasies, couldn’t do so in a long term and murdered real people instead.
Same goes with pedophiles. They want to fuck a child, use fictional characters to fulfill the phanstasy, get used to it and then escalate to pictures of real children and eventually real children.
Nightwalker Gloomy
I think I just briefly died of cringe.
“Oh, sry, I am listening to something right now and would appreciate not to be interrupted while I do so. If it’s nothing important that you need to talk about right now I am more than happy to chat with you later on.”
Fair enoth I guess, it’s not the same.
Seems to be an urban legend tough. Also racist.
I know plenty of women that carry an old school second name because there grandmother’s names are passed down. Like Elisabeth, or Rose or the like.
Gothic was one of the games of my youth. I am realy looking forward to the remake, thanka for bringing it up.
Recently I have been playing Valheim with my wife again. After a year of more or less non stop caring for the twins we have finally arrived at the point were we can game again together and it makes for even shorter nights but is such a treat to have that back. We used to game and hike a lot together before the children were there. Looking forward to go on long hikes again too, but for now a shared boat ride into the mistlands will do just fine.
Yeah, but do you know what their mum says about them?
I don’t know enough about Islam to claim that this applies, but it certainly applied to Christianity up until the enlightenment: there was no point in doing experiments to find out more about the world, the answer was already in the Bible. If you couldn’t see it yet, you needed to study the Bible more.
This is just plain wrong.
Have a look at this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_science_and_technology
What often happened was that rich people’s sons became priests, because it was a respected and not very time intensive endeavor. This would give them ample free time to engage with the sciences as much as they wanted.
She is still a human beeing that deserves not to be made fun of like this.
Eh, I don’t know. I mean, sure, there are stereotypes.
But it feels a bit different. I thinks it’s the difference between friendly banter, like friends do it sometimes, and blatant bullying.
I’ve done a little experiment. I went to https://witze.net/ , a website that is German and filled with humour that must be at least 30 years old. Many jokes refer to cultural events from that time (there was one about the explosion of the Challenger, which was in 1986). So that should give a good example of the time period I was reffing to.
You find examples of friendly banter for the French, etc.:
"Whats European heaven like?
The Englishman opens the door for you, the French is cooking, the Italian is the Entertainment and the German takes care of organising everything.
What’s European hell like?
The Frenchman opens the door, the Englishman is cooking, the German is the Entertainer and the Italian takes care of organising everything."
Not funny, but also just a play on stereotypes. It’s like that.
The polish stereotype is “they are thiefs”.
“Whs do Russians always steal two cars? Because they have to drive trough Poland on their way back.”
“Why is Viagra not allowed in Poland? Because everything that stands longer than 10 Minute is stolen.”
And on and on.
Am I imagining that there is a difference if your stereotype is “bad at humour” (which the German website proves quite well ironically) or “steals everything all the time”?
And Fashism!